Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Baby taken from parents who sought second opinion

Baby taken from parents who sought second opinion removed from protective custody
Published April 30, 2013
FoxNews.com
One California couple is celebrating after a Sacramento county judge ordered their 5-month-old son be taken out of protective custody and transported to a Stanford hospital in Palo Alto, News 10 reported.
The decision came one week after police and Child Protective Services removed Anna and Alex Nikolayev’s son, Sammy, from the couple’s house. The reason: They had sought a second medical opinion for their child.
The Nikolayevs can now see Sammy whenever they want and have control over the child’s medical decisions, but CPS will continue to monitor the situation.
“It’s like a special day for us,” Anna told News 10, a local ABC affiliate. “We’re like a unit with our son again.”
The Nikolayevs, a young Russian couple living in Sacramento, took their 5-month-old son Sammy to Sutter Memorial Hospital in Sacramento when he started to exhibit flu-like symptoms. But when they arrived at the hospital, the couple became concerned about their son’s treatment, after Anna witnessed a nurse giving Sammy antibiotics – something a doctor had not instructed her to do.
After hearing their son needed open heart surgery as soon as possible, the Nikolayevs took Sammy out of Sutter Memorial without a formal discharge and rushed him to Kaiser Parmanente Medical Center in Sacramento, a rival hospital to Sutter. There, the child was deemed clinically safe to return home with his parents.
But just one day later, the police and CPS arrived to take Sammy from his parents. He was placed in protective custody, and the parents were granted limited visitation rights.
Now, by order of the judge, Sammy will stay at Stanford Medical Center, where he will get a second medical opinion. However, the couple must allow CPS to visit their home once Sammy is discharged, and they must agree to never take him from a hospital against medical advice.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/04/30/baby-taken-from-parents-who-sought-second-opinion-removed-from-protective/#ixzz2Rzf3IGt6
by on Apr. 30, 2013 at 7:47 PM
Replies (21-30):
RandRMomma
by Maya on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:18 PM
1 mom liked this
It's their rights as parents to make any medical decisions they seem necessary, even if the doctors disagree. The doctor overstepped their bounds IMO.

Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:

The real problem is they took a baby who may or may not have had a life-threatening emergency from a hospital.  Did they try the proper route of asking to have him transported to another hospital in an ambulance to obtain the second opinion?  

I can see why CPS pursued it.  They may not have known he was taken to another hospital, they may have just taken him home for all they knew.

It sucks, but there are proper procedures for these things. These procedures keep parents from taking dying children around in their cars for other opinions.  At least in an ambulance or helicopter they would still have life-saving equipment and trained professionals.

RandRMomma
by Maya on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:20 PM
That's messed up.

Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:

"Now, by order of the judge, Sammy will stay at Stanford Medical Center, where he will get a second medical opinion. However, the couple must allow CPS to visit their home once Sammy is discharged, and they must agree to never take him from a hospital against medical advice."





Now the State has control over this child. Coming to a state near you.
Mrs.Kubalabuku
by on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:21 PM


Like I said, I feel awful for the family.

BUT

I can see how CPS justified it.

It might strike a nerve, but if you can somehow try to see if from a CPS worker's perspective you may learn something more.

Pretend you get a call that doctors claim this baby is in life or death situations.  You show up at the house, and what is the FIRST instinct going to be?  Take the baby to a doctor.  Remember, the doctors who reported this were certain the baby needed surgery and soon.  THEN start checking and investigating.  I'll say that not even letting them see the baby was very harsh.  But if they suspected they'd snatch and run, I can see how they would keep them away.  IMO, there is no reason they couldn't see pics or videos of the baby.  (There hasn't been much said on if they became threatening or belligerent during this process that would make them further restrict access to the baby.)

The fact is, there ARE proper channels they should have followed.  It sucks they didn't follow them and this happened.  But the stories I think should be in the media more are the ones where the was ZERO justification for them to take the baby.

Because really, CPS does more harm than good to many of the families they come across.  Why do we have to read about babies DYING and being left for weeks in bath tubs, all while CPS is "checking in" and then read stories about parents who made a mistake while trying to protect their baby losing him for any length of time at all?  

First, CPS has rules that must be followed.  Protocols and procedures.  But, they are convoluted, with so much being left open to the interpretation of the person.  It is a severely broken system.

But in THIS case, I can see why CPS became so concerned.  The parents took a child that might have died without proper medical care (for all they knew at the time they took him) out of the hospital without following proper procedures.  I think we'd all be crying foul if the child HAD died while between hospitals.

So if they are going to highlight the problems with CPS and the system, they need to tell us the stories about case workers who just go in and take with no reason at all.

Quoting viv212:

Let the government take your baby away from you so you can determine if it was resolved quickly. Which by the way it wasn't.

I don't mean to sound snappy but I've been through this so it touches a nerve. It strikes a nerve.


Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:


When the well-being of children are involved, I think they do err on guilty until proven innocent.

I'm glad this one resolved happily within a short time frame.  You are right, some people get their children taken away with FAR less reasoning than this, and lose them for years trying to prove their innocence.


Quoting viv212:

Or is it guilty until proven innocent?



This happens all the time, this couple just grabbed media attention.




Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:


I can't begin to imagine the feeling.  But the fact remains: they didn't know the baby would be OK when they took him from the hospital.  At the time they took him, it was believed he was in a life-threatening situation that needed medical monitoring to ensure his safety until the procedure.

If they were willing to take him then, WHY would CPS be forced to believe they would keep him safe?  I'm playing Devil's Advocate here.  I can see why they took him, I really can.  But legally, there were other channels they were supposed to follow to ensure his safety while a second opinion was being sought.  They did not follow those channels, and HAD he really had a heart problem, he could have died in the car between hospitals.

CPS is forced to look from the perspective of what could have happened, and how greatly they jeopardized his safety, not on "oh, well everything turned out OK."  So what CPS sees: Child is diagnosed with a life-threatening condition.  Parents leave with the child against medical advice.  They failed to ask for transport.  From the sounds of it, they failed to address most of their concerns with the medical staff adequately.  Again, it might have been the language barrier.

Now imagine you are the nurse or doctor.  You believe a child with a serious heart condition has just vanished from your hospital.  You worry he could die without proper medical care.  You make the call.

Now imagine you are CPS.  You hear what the doctors have to say.  You get copies of the medical information, and the fact the parents and child are now missing.  You get to the home, and take the child for further care.  The first priority is to take the child to a doctor.  From there, you consider the danger the parents put him in during unadvised, unsupervised transport to another hospital.  You follow the procedures in place.

Until you can investigate, you limit their access.

All in all, this process only took a week.  I don't think it was entirely unreasonable, though my heart DOES bleed for them.  I don't think they even knew all their options on getting a second opinion, so I am glad they were reunited with their baby.

If you look at their interviews, they aren't speaking the best English.  Also, by this point they have been groomed by lawyers on what to say.  it's a sad reality of our society.  Take their side, and the hospital's side, and split it down the middle and that is the closest to the truth we might come.



Quoting Healthystart30:

Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:








But the second hospital said the baby could go home. And they said themselves that someone had told them at the first hospital that the surgery wouldn't be done right away. As far as I know the baby hasn't had heart surgery yet and was in a foster home, not a hospital. I understand that sometimes hospitals have to overstep the boundaries when parents aren't doing what's best for the child, but I feel like this was about something else, and not about the welfare of the baby. And it's just scary that CPS can take a baby away, even though another doctor/hospital said the baby could go home.


And even if they didn't have the other hospitals report right away, they didn't let the parents take pictures or videos of their baby, and they were treated like criminals, only got to see the baby an hour at a time. Can you imagine the feeling?










GoddessNDaRuff
by Silver Member on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:25 PM

The end is BULLSHIT, but I am glad they got their child back. Why can't these assholes just admit they were WRONG!

Mrs.Kubalabuku
by on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:28 PM


Then it was within their rights to demand a second opinion.  In which case, another doctor could have come to the hospital from an outside practice, another specialist from within the hospital could have stepped in and done an evaluation, or they could have requested proper medical transportation for the child to another hospital.

The big question here that CPS faces: If the child HAD died between hospitals, what then?  The parents didn't like that hospital, but for all they knew he had a serious and possibly fatal condition, and there were more options than to up and leave that would have gotten him better help without jeopardizing his condition.

I think the hospital is probably largely at fault for not explaining their options to them.  I think a language barrier might have been part of the issue.  (If you listen to interviews they have given, their English is not perfect.  Dealing with medical jargon, they may have been in very unfamiliar waters.)  But translators are available at most locations, even if they have to do it by proxy (video conference, phone, etc.)

But what the doctors saw was a child they truly believed needed surgery to survive missing from the hospital, and they are mandatory reporters.  So they called it in.  And what CPS saw was parents who endangered his life rather than follow proper channels to address the situation.

Quoting RandRMomma:

It's their rights as parents to make any medical decisions they seem necessary, even if the doctors disagree. The doctor overstepped their bounds IMO.

Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:

The real problem is they took a baby who may or may not have had a life-threatening emergency from a hospital.  Did they try the proper route of asking to have him transported to another hospital in an ambulance to obtain the second opinion?  

I can see why CPS pursued it.  They may not have known he was taken to another hospital, they may have just taken him home for all they knew.

It sucks, but there are proper procedures for these things. These procedures keep parents from taking dying children around in their cars for other opinions.  At least in an ambulance or helicopter they would still have life-saving equipment and trained professionals.



Mrs_Nelson
by Member on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:35 PM
2 moms liked this
The mother has stated more than once that the baby was given drugs by a careless nurse against doctors instructions and after the mother mentioned this she was ignored. Also there has been no indication that the baby was at immediate risk of harm other than the report made to cps that was contradicted by another hospital and now by a judge. The parents were worried about the sub standard care their baby was receiving and wanted to get a second opinion. There is also a video of the police physically attacking the father and cps along with more police threatening the mother. These people were victimised by power mad government and hospital staff. They should have dropped the whol thing as soon as they realized that the parents took the baby directly to another hospital where the baby was cleared to go home. These parents very likely protected their baby from a dangerous and unnecessary surgery.


Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:


I can't begin to imagine the feeling.  But the fact remains: they didn't know the baby would be OK when they took him from the hospital.  At the time they took him, it was believed he was in a life-threatening situation that needed medical monitoring to ensure his safety until the procedure.

If they were willing to take him then, WHY would CPS be forced to believe they would keep him safe?  I'm playing Devil's Advocate here.  I can see why they took him, I really can.  But legally, there were other channels they were supposed to follow to ensure his safety while a second opinion was being sought.  They did not follow those channels, and HAD he really had a heart problem, he could have died in the car between hospitals.

CPS is forced to look from the perspective of what could have happened, and how greatly they jeopardized his safety, not on "oh, well everything turned out OK."  So what CPS sees: Child is diagnosed with a life-threatening condition.  Parents leave with the child against medical advice.  They failed to ask for transport.  From the sounds of it, they failed to address most of their concerns with the medical staff adequately.  Again, it might have been the language barrier.

Now imagine you are the nurse or doctor.  You believe a child with a serious heart condition has just vanished from your hospital.  You worry he could die without proper medical care.  You make the call.

Now imagine you are CPS.  You hear what the doctors have to say.  You get copies of the medical information, and the fact the parents and child are now missing.  You get to the home, and take the child for further care.  The first priority is to take the child to a doctor.  From there, you consider the danger the parents put him in during unadvised, unsupervised transport to another hospital.  You follow the procedures in place.

Until you can investigate, you limit their access.

All in all, this process only took a week.  I don't think it was entirely unreasonable, though my heart DOES bleed for them.  I don't think they even knew all their options on getting a second opinion, so I am glad they were reunited with their baby.

If you look at their interviews, they aren't speaking the best English.  Also, by this point they have been groomed by lawyers on what to say.  it's a sad reality of our society.  Take their side, and the hospital's side, and split it down the middle and that is the closest to the truth we might come.


Quoting Healthystart30:

Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:






But the second hospital said the baby could go home. And they said themselves that someone had told them at the first hospital that the surgery wouldn't be done right away. As far as I know the baby hasn't had heart surgery yet and was in a foster home, not a hospital. I understand that sometimes hospitals have to overstep the boundaries when parents aren't doing what's best for the child, but I feel like this was about something else, and not about the welfare of the baby. And it's just scary that CPS can take a baby away, even though another doctor/hospital said the baby could go home.

And even if they didn't have the other hospitals report right away, they didn't let the parents take pictures or videos of their baby, and they were treated like criminals, only got to see the baby an hour at a time. Can you imagine the feeling?





viv212
by Gold Member on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:40 PM
No you are wrong.

This is YOUR child and CPS can take it away without following proper procedure, which you can just say "that sucks". No, it's wrong.

Secondly, once it's determined that the child can be given back to their parents, but CPS still has to monitor them? Do you realize what this means? That CPS can enter your house any damn time they want and take the baby again. This means that the parents still have to wait for a court case until it is official that the parents can have their child back. Obviously you have never dealt with it but I have and you know what I learned? That there is no agency, or dept that you can contact in regards to CPS to file an appeal. They have you by the balls and you have no say so.

Try having no contact with your baby and no say so as to where this child goes when it leaves your home with a stranger in a county car. I'm sure you'll be singing a different tune.


Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:


Like I said, I feel awful for the family.

BUT

I can see how CPS justified it.

It might strike a nerve, but if you can somehow try to see if from a CPS worker's perspective you may learn something more.

Pretend you get a call that doctors claim this baby is in life or death situations.  You show up at the house, and what is the FIRST instinct going to be?  Take the baby to a doctor.  Remember, the doctors who reported this were certain the baby needed surgery and soon.  THEN start checking and investigating.  I'll say that not even letting them see the baby was very harsh.  But if they suspected they'd snatch and run, I can see how they would keep them away.  IMO, there is no reason they couldn't see pics or videos of the baby.  (There hasn't been much said on if they became threatening or belligerent during this process that would make them further restrict access to the baby.)

The fact is, there ARE proper channels they should have followed.  It sucks they didn't follow them and this happened.  But the stories I think should be in the media more are the ones where the was ZERO justification for them to take the baby.

Because really, CPS does more harm than good to many of the families they come across.  Why do we have to read about babies DYING and being left for weeks in bath tubs, all while CPS is "checking in" and then read stories about parents who made a mistake while trying to protect their baby losing him for any length of time at all?  

First, CPS has rules that must be followed.  Protocols and procedures.  But, they are convoluted, with so much being left open to the interpretation of the person.  It is a severely broken system.

But in THIS case, I can see why CPS became so concerned.  The parents took a child that might have died without proper medical care (for all they knew at the time they took him) out of the hospital without following proper procedures.  I think we'd all be crying foul if the child HAD died while between hospitals.

So if they are going to highlight the problems with CPS and the system, they need to tell us the stories about case workers who just go in and take with no reason at all.


Quoting viv212:

Let the government take your baby away from you so you can determine if it was resolved quickly. Which by the way it wasn't.



I don't mean to sound snappy but I've been through this so it touches a nerve. It strikes a nerve.




Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:


When the well-being of children are involved, I think they do err on guilty until proven innocent.

I'm glad this one resolved happily within a short time frame.  You are right, some people get their children taken away with FAR less reasoning than this, and lose them for years trying to prove their innocence.



Quoting viv212:

Or is it guilty until proven innocent?





This happens all the time, this couple just grabbed media attention.






Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:


I can't begin to imagine the feeling.  But the fact remains: they didn't know the baby would be OK when they took him from the hospital.  At the time they took him, it was believed he was in a life-threatening situation that needed medical monitoring to ensure his safety until the procedure.

If they were willing to take him then, WHY would CPS be forced to believe they would keep him safe?  I'm playing Devil's Advocate here.  I can see why they took him, I really can.  But legally, there were other channels they were supposed to follow to ensure his safety while a second opinion was being sought.  They did not follow those channels, and HAD he really had a heart problem, he could have died in the car between hospitals.

CPS is forced to look from the perspective of what could have happened, and how greatly they jeopardized his safety, not on "oh, well everything turned out OK."  So what CPS sees: Child is diagnosed with a life-threatening condition.  Parents leave with the child against medical advice.  They failed to ask for transport.  From the sounds of it, they failed to address most of their concerns with the medical staff adequately.  Again, it might have been the language barrier.

Now imagine you are the nurse or doctor.  You believe a child with a serious heart condition has just vanished from your hospital.  You worry he could die without proper medical care.  You make the call.

Now imagine you are CPS.  You hear what the doctors have to say.  You get copies of the medical information, and the fact the parents and child are now missing.  You get to the home, and take the child for further care.  The first priority is to take the child to a doctor.  From there, you consider the danger the parents put him in during unadvised, unsupervised transport to another hospital.  You follow the procedures in place.

Until you can investigate, you limit their access.

All in all, this process only took a week.  I don't think it was entirely unreasonable, though my heart DOES bleed for them.  I don't think they even knew all their options on getting a second opinion, so I am glad they were reunited with their baby.

If you look at their interviews, they aren't speaking the best English.  Also, by this point they have been groomed by lawyers on what to say.  it's a sad reality of our society.  Take their side, and the hospital's side, and split it down the middle and that is the closest to the truth we might come.




Quoting Healthystart30:

Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:










But the second hospital said the baby could go home. And they said themselves that someone had told them at the first hospital that the surgery wouldn't be done right away. As far as I know the baby hasn't had heart surgery yet and was in a foster home, not a hospital. I understand that sometimes hospitals have to overstep the boundaries when parents aren't doing what's best for the child, but I feel like this was about something else, and not about the welfare of the baby. And it's just scary that CPS can take a baby away, even though another doctor/hospital said the baby could go home.



And even if they didn't have the other hospitals report right away, they didn't let the parents take pictures or videos of their baby, and they were treated like criminals, only got to see the baby an hour at a time. Can you imagine the feeling?













Mrs.Kubalabuku
by on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:42 PM


They should have followed proper discharge procedures.  They say they got substandard care, but nowhere in there do they even mention asking how to properly go about getting a second opinion.  They state they will take the baby, but they don't ask how to go about this safely.

I'm not saying they didn't do what they felt was right.  I'm not saying the hospital made no mistakes.  I AM saying this could have probably been avoided had they insisted on the second opinion and going to another hospital.  The doctors might have not liked it at first, but in the end they would likely have figured out how to transport the baby.

I have seen this first hand.  My friends had a premature baby with an infection.  They didn't feel the hospital they were at could treat him properly after watching nurses struggle to put IVs and such in his tiny veins. They requested a transfer to the children's hospital across town.  At first, it was denied because the nurses and doctors were worried to move him.  They demanded the transfer and stood their ground.  The doctors and nurses called the other hospital, got the special equipment brought in, and transferred him.  It can suck, you really have to stand your ground.  But there are safe ways to transport ill (or suspected ill) children to other hospitals.

Quoting Mrs_Nelson:

The mother has stated more than once that the baby was given drugs by a careless nurse against doctors instructions and after the mother mentioned this she was ignored. Also there has been no indication that the baby was at immediate risk of harm other than the report made to cps that was contradicted by another hospital and now by a judge. The parents were worried about the sub standard care their baby was receiving and wanted to get a second opinion. There is also a video of the police physically attacking the father and cps along with more police threatening the mother. These people were victimised by power mad government and hospital staff. They should have dropped the whol thing as soon as they realized that the parents took the baby directly to another hospital where the baby was cleared to go home. These parents very likely protected their baby from a dangerous and unnecessary surgery.


Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:


I can't begin to imagine the feeling.  But the fact remains: they didn't know the baby would be OK when they took him from the hospital.  At the time they took him, it was believed he was in a life-threatening situation that needed medical monitoring to ensure his safety until the procedure.

If they were willing to take him then, WHY would CPS be forced to believe they would keep him safe?  I'm playing Devil's Advocate here.  I can see why they took him, I really can.  But legally, there were other channels they were supposed to follow to ensure his safety while a second opinion was being sought.  They did not follow those channels, and HAD he really had a heart problem, he could have died in the car between hospitals.

CPS is forced to look from the perspective of what could have happened, and how greatly they jeopardized his safety, not on "oh, well everything turned out OK."  So what CPS sees: Child is diagnosed with a life-threatening condition.  Parents leave with the child against medical advice.  They failed to ask for transport.  From the sounds of it, they failed to address most of their concerns with the medical staff adequately.  Again, it might have been the language barrier.

Now imagine you are the nurse or doctor.  You believe a child with a serious heart condition has just vanished from your hospital.  You worry he could die without proper medical care.  You make the call.

Now imagine you are CPS.  You hear what the doctors have to say.  You get copies of the medical information, and the fact the parents and child are now missing.  You get to the home, and take the child for further care.  The first priority is to take the child to a doctor.  From there, you consider the danger the parents put him in during unadvised, unsupervised transport to another hospital.  You follow the procedures in place.

Until you can investigate, you limit their access.

All in all, this process only took a week.  I don't think it was entirely unreasonable, though my heart DOES bleed for them.  I don't think they even knew all their options on getting a second opinion, so I am glad they were reunited with their baby.

If you look at their interviews, they aren't speaking the best English.  Also, by this point they have been groomed by lawyers on what to say.  it's a sad reality of our society.  Take their side, and the hospital's side, and split it down the middle and that is the closest to the truth we might come.


Quoting Healthystart30:

Quoting Mrs.Kubalabuku:






But the second hospital said the baby could go home. And they said themselves that someone had told them at the first hospital that the surgery wouldn't be done right away. As far as I know the baby hasn't had heart surgery yet and was in a foster home, not a hospital. I understand that sometimes hospitals have to overstep the boundaries when parents aren't doing what's best for the child, but I feel like this was about something else, and not about the welfare of the baby. And it's just scary that CPS can take a baby away, even though another doctor/hospital said the baby could go home.

And even if they didn't have the other hospitals report right away, they didn't let the parents take pictures or videos of their baby, and they were treated like criminals, only got to see the baby an hour at a time. Can you imagine the feeling?







Martina70
by Bronze Member on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:50 PM


I don't think they were poor, the parents are reportedly highly educated and from the video I saw of their home (when the police entered) they were in no way living in a slum. 

Quoting Healthystart30:

Is this because they are foreigners? Or poor? Or both? This is just crazy! Doctors shouldn't have the power to do what they want with our children! Not every doctor is right at all times! They have to promise never to take him against medical advice again? They didn't just take him home, they got a second opinion! This whole thing is sickening!



JoshRachelsMAMA
by JRM on Apr. 30, 2013 at 10:59 PM
2 moms liked this
Since when do we give up the right to determine what is best for our children the minute we walk through hospital doors?

Since when do we need PERMISSION to remove our child from a hospital? "Proper" procedures are not LAWS.

Ooooooo this story makes my fucking skin burn.

Quoting viv212:Right. A normal thing that any parent might do.

Quoting randi1978:

I think it's fucked that they have to allow CPS to continue to fuck with their lives.

They were unhappy with what Sutter was doing and took the child out and straight to another facility for a second opinion, which was their right, heart murmur or no heart murmur.  Sutter would have made it difficult, if not impossible, for them to try to get a proper discharge and most likely would have had CPS on their backs before they made it out the door if they had tried the right way.

Again, they took the child to another hospital and got the ok from the doctor and the cops who Sutter called on them that night.  The doctors in charge at Sutter LIED to police and CPS to get that baby back.  I hope the parents sue them all into bankruptcy.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)