|
Post by Angela on Apr 24, 2009 22:54:09 GMT -5
I like the way you put that too NascarLover. You are right. I'm sure it wasn't purposely done but get real folks, hygiene is hygiene and they really should have known that being doctors, even back then. LuvmyDog
|
|
|
Post by Angela on Apr 25, 2009 13:55:00 GMT -5
Since Marion and Jettie were so fond of Dr. Chester Helsabeck, I wonder if by naming one of their sons Chester if they were naming him after Dr. Helsabeck. Poor little mite didn't live long either...less than a year. Maria
|
|
|
Post by debbie on Apr 27, 2009 8:38:51 GMT -5
I wonder if his drunkedness (sp) is the real culprit here. I'm sure he wasn't exactly focused on the delivery of the baby. Maybe Jettie was suffering from some sort of problem during childbirth and the doctor botched up some way. Its really hard for me to believe that this man DIDN'T wash his hand. I'm sure he performed this procedure many times. Maybe poor sterilization of his tools could have caused the infection.
|
|
|
Post by smpyrtle on Apr 27, 2009 10:19:02 GMT -5
It seems like several things caused this tragedy. The doctor being drunk and not being clean. It is so hard to believe that women had to suffer like this and I know Jettie must have really suffered. An infection like that would really be painful. I'm so glad that women now don't go through that at least not usually if they are in a hospital. This woman's life was cut short by negligence.
Vickie, your quotation is very sobering. I had an Uncle to tell me at the funeral home when his wife died that we all had to face this. How true.
|
|
|
Post by angel71242 on Apr 27, 2009 11:14:20 GMT -5
I don't find it hard at all to believe that Dr. Helsabeck didn't wash his hands. Apparently there are doctors TODAY that don't wash their hands like they are supposed to. See the below I found on the internet.
Nevertheless, in 1981 Albert and Condie observed that handwashing rates in an intensive-care unit varied between 30-48% (New England Journal of Medicine, 304, 1465-1466, 1981). Apparently, handwashing doesn’t come any more naturally to modern physicians than it did their 19th century forebears.
The problem persists. In 1996, Tibbals reported that only 12% of physicians in a pediatric intensive-care unit washed their hands after patient contact (Medical Journal of Australia, 164, 395, 1996). Even after an intensive program of education, monitoring, and feedback, handwashing rates rose only to 17%. When another sample of doctors were surveyed about their behavior, they reported that they washed their hands from 50-95% of the time; but when they were surreptitiously observed, their actual rate was as low as 9%. Pritchard and Raper, commenting on this study (Medical Journal of Australia, 164, 389-390, 1996), wrote that
It seems a terrible indictment of doctors that practices and protocols must be developed to take the place of something as simple… as hand washing. Perhaps an even bigger concern for current medical practice, and one which should lead us all to do some soul searching, is that careful and caring doctors can be extraordinarily self-delusional about their behavior
Who knows..maybe Dr. Helsabeck did wash his hands, just not good enough. But knowing that there are Drs today that don't wash their hands, knowing everything that we know now, it is very easy to believe that a Dr. in 1929 wouldn't wash his hands.
|
|
|
Post by Brian on Apr 27, 2009 11:57:32 GMT -5
Maybe they don't wash their hands today because they always wear latex gloves (and they're lazy, and it's time consuming, and it dries their skin). You're just going to put gloves on anyway, who's gonna know.
|
|
|
Post by angel71242 on Apr 28, 2009 12:43:12 GMT -5
Yeah, but they have to touch those gloves to put them on...touch the outside....with dirty hands....they might as well not wear gloves at all!!
|
|