Health officials: transfusion infected 2nd patient
A Friday evening press conference is not the best way to get your story out…but then again maybe that’s the idea. Minister of Health Jose Coye and his top lieutenants spoke to the media this evening to give their explanation of how a baby from Punta Gorda went into the Southern Regional Hospital for routine treatment and came out infected with deadly HIV. That session has just concluded and News 5’s Jacqueline Woods is back with the story.
Jacqueline Woods, Reporting
The Ministry of Health says the investigation into the death of one year, four month old Ashton Chun is not yet been completed, but they have made some progress in determining why baby Chun was transfused with HIV tainted blood plasma on May eighth, 2001.
According to public relations officer, Glenn Tillett, the blood in question was donated on September fifteenth, 2000 at the Southern Regional Hospital. The sample was then sent to the Central Medical Lab and seven days later, a test revealed that it was HIV positive. According to Tillett, the reason why the supply was not destroyed is because of a communication breakdown between medical staff at the Central Medical Lab.
Glenn Tillett, P.R. Officer, Min. of Health
“You have to remember that under the old system there was some communication back and forth regarding the results of tests by telephone. So we are looking at a situation where at this point somebody is saying, well we called and we were told that it was negative and somebody is saying, well they didn’t call.”
Jacqueline Woods
“Following the incident of last year April, why then wasn’t another check done of the supplies that were already stored?”
Glenn Tillett
“The first answer to that is that there wasn’t a directive ordering what was call a re-consignation of the inventory. The incident you referred to last year happened in mid-April. The plasma was transfused on May eighth I believe. During that period, we are looking at an entire nation so…”
Jacqueline Woods
“So there was just not enough time…
Glenn Tillett
“You are looking at a very short period of time.”
Jacqueline Woods
“Now we understand from the parents that only a portion of the bag was used, that baby Ashton didn’t receive this entire bag. Do you all believe that somebody else may have been transfused with this plasma?”
Glenn Tillett
“We have reason to believe that is the case and we don’t wish to do into detail because we are still going through the process of contacting the person and conducting the contact tracing.”
Jacqueline Woods
“So only one other person you’re saying…”
Glenn Tillett
“We are still investigating to see how the blood was used and who all may have gotten the blood.”
Jacqueline Woods
“This other person that you’re specifically looking for, can you tell us if it is a child, an adult, a teenager?”
Glenn Tillett
“Please understand that under the rules of patient confidentiality, we are not to say anything from which you can infer this person’s identity. That is why we are not providing any details.”
Jacqueline Woods
“But you have an idea of who this person is.”
Glenn Tillett
“Yes we do, but we can’t divulge any details. We are not to say anything that you can infer this person’s identity from. And that covers a wide range.”
Jose Coye, Minister of Health
“Firstly, I am as the Minister of Health, responsible for all the subjects under the portfolio, as any ministers are of the Cabinet. The question now is that we need to determine is not who is responsible; the question is that has anything gone wrong within the system. And if anything went wrong, what were the circumstances under which it went wrong. Are we dealing with an error of professional judgement, are we dealing with negligence, are we dealing with reckless disregard for human life? Professionals in life undertake, not for infallibility, but for good faith. In our investigation, whatever the consequences, and I repeat, a life has been lost, it’s invaluable, but we must continue to search to find out under what circumstances that life was lost. But as to responsibility, the Ministry is responsible for every person that comes under its care in every facility it has in this country. The question of guilt is another matter. That is what we can find from the investigation.”
Jacqueline Woods
“My question now is, just how safe then are the blood samples taken before April 2001?”
Jose Coye
“I would venture to say here, and I will expect that this is the question that can be asked… I recall indeed that we did mention that the virus was detected in this country, I think it was ’86, some said ’85, my recollection was it was done in ’86. If one were to begin to take the question to its logical conclusion, this Ministry cannot give any absolute assurance that never before in the past has anybody been contaminated. I don’t think any institution would be able to do that, but what we did last year when we found a weakness in the system because of the way it was being operated, mainly in transferring information by telephone call–out of expediency–we mention back then that there was the demand for blood, and yes, the donors were not as forthcoming as we would like to. So what was happening, was that blood had to be used in these cases, and what they were doing, rather than to wait for the printout to be sent to the point where the blood is, they would do it by oral communication, by phone. That is a weakness in the system.
“What we have to do in this process is to balance the risks that we are taken by not giving blood until it has been tested properly, and that the written report has been sent. And that is what we decided to do last year. And those are decisions you have to give under those circumstances, is that the blood is needed but tests have not been completed, it is better to wait for the written report to be given. We put that into effect last year, that it must be the written report. In other words, what we are saying is that blood that has been received must clearly be separated as unscreened blood and none must be used until when the written report has been given on that blood, not by telephone conversation.”
Jacqueline Woods
“Miguelina, why did you come to today’s briefing?”
Miguelina Mendez, Mother of Ashton Chun
“Well I came because I wanted to hear what they had to say. And knowing that the baby had died from HIV supposedly, I wanted to learn more about it and see if I can answer my questions.”
Jacqueline Woods
“Are you satisfied with what you heard?”
Miguelina Mendez
“Well I am satisfied because now I know that the bag they gave the baby from was positive, but accordingly they knew afterwards, which was late for the baby.”
Jacqueline Woods
“What will the family do now?”
Miguelina Mendez
“I’m not sure, but we are intending to file a lawsuit unless the come in cooperation with us. Because like I said, they can’t bring back the baby, the baby is gone but we could save other people’s lives, other children.”
Reporting for News 5, Jacqueline Woods.
On the issue of compensation for the family of Ashton Chun, Coye said that the matter will be dealt with upon conclusion of the investigation. As for the six year old girl, infected in April of 2001, discussions are ongoing between the solicitor general on behalf of Government and attorneys for the girl’s family.
