Dentist visit turns life threatening
 

Here is the link: Dentist visit turns life threatening

and here is the article:


My co-worker turned around and asked me if I go into the dentist office with my children. Once I did not. My daughter was getting a cavity filled and the dentist told me that children react differently with the parent around, I was told to wait in the waiting room. My chest was hurting so much, I could not stand not knowing what was happening. Never, ever again. I will always go in the room from now on. If my dentist does not like it, I will bring a printed copy of this article.

Is it common practice to make the parents wait outside when sedating a child? I sure hope not.

If you have children, do you go in to the dentist office with them? If you don't, will you now? What are your thoughts on this?

In reading the article, I am curious why a 5 year old would have to get caps on her front teeth that are probably still baby teeth?

(This is my first time posting an article. If I did it wrong or it is in the wrong place, please let me know.There was a video too, with more details. But I was not sure if I could post it, or even how to)

Here is the link to the video. Just in case.

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=2491909

Thats alot of sedatives, when i had my fillings done i got a shot in my gum and held onto the seat. Definatly a fault there. I've heard a few cases of kids being given too many sedatives by dentists over here, which given the fact that dentists are not anethatists doesn't suprise me too much when it happens, even though it is horribly tragic.

What i'm curious about is why does a 5 year old need two fillings? Sheesh.

seems like a little much for a 5 year old...

my parents did not go into the office while I was getting cavities filled from my earliest dental memories to even when I was a teen having braces put on.

Dentist, doctor, whatever, I'm in the office with my kid. I suppose if he had major surgery I'd consent to be in the viewing area just outside, for sterility purposes, but I wouldn't even be happy about that. Hell I go back with my dogs when they're at the vet.

Fact is there are a lot of people out there who are lousy at their jobs, and the medical profession is not immune to that. If they won't let me go back there, I find a different doctor.

Why on earth did he give her all that when a single shot of novacaine was enough? I can't help but feel had her mother been in there, she would have at least questioned all that....if that kid dies, I would fully expect the dentist to be charged with negligent homicide.
I only went in with my kids their very first visits, but then again, they have never needed fillings or other work done except for cleanings and flouride sealings.
I seem to recall my mother being in with me at first, until the actual work started.
There are protocols to be followed regarding administering anesthesia that go by age, weight, etc. My sister's friend died as a young teenager from an OD of anesthesia during surgery to correct her scoliosis. That was always in the back of my mind each surgery I went in for....and while it's certainly rare to happen, it shouldn't happen at all.

they were putting caps on a FIVE year old?

my daughter fell when she was about 7 and broke her front two perm teeth....when I called to make the appt the Dentist asked me to make sure I was going to be there for the appt because he would be using gas and didnt want her in the room without me

Absolutely.

My niece, who is all of six, went into surgery last Wednesday where the dentist capped nearly all her back teeth....in silver. They put her under anesthesia to cap them, slap in spacers and clean her front teeth. My sister said it took all of 30 minutes and she was second in a group of five kids undergoing the procedure that day.

When she told me that, I was floored. I'm 27 years old and had a number of procedures done; the most I've ever gotten was some nitrous. And I didn't have any semi-serious surgery until the permanent teeth kicked in. Until then it was "We'll keep an eye on it" or "We're just going to yank it out."

Edit:
I don't have any kids and I don't take my sister's kids to the doctor, but if I did, I would certainly be back there. Not that I would know what to look for; just to be around.

There is a perfectly good reason to keep the parents out of the room. People freak out and can become distrations (not justifying what happened though).

Following a number of similar deaths here in the UK, this was outlawed years ago.

It is no longer allowed for a dentist to anaesthetise a patient in the dental practice - only a licenced anaesthetist (in American it's anestesiologist, I think) may put someone under.

There is a real chance (in the region of one or two percent) of serious complications with any anaesthetic - including death.

I don't care if parents are in the office when I'm working BUT.....

There are parents so overprotective and babying that their little darling will use that to manipulate the parent. I see it quite often and when their parents leave suddenly their little darling doesn't seem to be in so much discomfort and has no problems with the procedures.

If this is the case, then I ask them to leave. Some dentists are not as patient as I am with it and just don't let anyone back. Overall its better if they are not back, but understanding parents I don't think its a good idea myself.

In reading the article, I am curious why a 5 year old would have to get caps on her front teeth that are probably still baby teeth?

Very baddly rotted teeth do require a form of temporary cap in a child. The story says 'two cavities' but I rather doubt thats the full diagnosis.

Wow what a fluff piece on ABC (just watched it) showed nothing of value, just a scare the parents thing.

Anyways either they gave her too much/the wrong anesthetic, or the child had an undiagnosed condition which caused the issue with the anesthetic.

I'm meeting a pediatric dentist on Thrusday, I'll ask him if he knows anything about the details.

I remember when my brother and I were small and my mom took us to the dentist. My brother got to the point where he would not even get in the car to go and was scared to death of the "seatbelts" or "straps" as he called them, in the car. My mom could not understand why all of a sudden my 5 year old brother was terrified of seatbelts. Turns out they had been strapping him down with black belts of some sort as the dentist and my mom had no idea because she was not allowed in the room. Needless to say, she didn't take us there anymore.

While I can understand that parents might hinder the process while being in the room, I don't think as a soon to be parent I would ever consent to having my child anestisized at the dentist.

Jesus. I had major dental work done as a child (three teeth extractions, had some bottom teeth shaved to make room for the others, and had many, many fillings and seals done) but I NEVER received an intravenous sedative. My dentist, who was a pediatric dentist, would give me some Valium before the procedure (only for the tooth extractions and shavings) and then nitrous oxide during the procedure along with a shot of Novocaine. The Valium would knock me out completely.

I can't imagine why a child would possibly need an intravenous sedative when I found Valium and nitrous oxide to be more than enough. I remember one time after a tooth extraction that I woke up enough in the dentist's office for them to let me go home, and then once in the car I conked out for another hour.

Furthermore, a good dentist doesn't mind if a parent is there during a procedure--they have nothing to hide.

If the kid was lying there unattended, after being sedated, that is horribly wrong.

That said, there are dentists licensed to sedate. There are offices in which an anesthesiologist handles the sedation. If those are unacceptable to the patient, or the patient's parents, the only other option is general anesthesia at a hospital. Much bigger $$$, and it's a bit of a crapshoot as to whether insurance will cover it.

Just trying to fill in some blanks.

Ustwo - I was hoping you'd respond to this thread. I'm very interested to hear what you find out as well as any other opinions you've formed.

edit: as far as whether or not anesthesia use is proper for a 5-year old, I think that there's only one active member of TFP qualified to make that judgement, and he's licensed to do so. Anyone else here critisizing the doctor for its use in general isn't qualified in any way, shape or form to do so.

Thanks Ustwo for the dentist's perspective and insider look on things. As horrifying as the article was, we still need to keep in mind that we may or may not have all the facts (annoying media).

I don't ever recall any of my parents with me in the dentist office, but my dentist was a children dentist. His office was decked out for kids. There were toys, kids magazines (Dynamite anyone?), balloons and lots of flavored flouride. Oh and stickers too. My favorite part was that he had the hottest, prettiest dental assistants and I just loved it when they leaned in close to "prep" me or start the cleaning on my teeth etc. I think I was 7-12 or so. Loved it! It got to the point whereI would eat some Oreo cookies right before the cleaning so that it would take longer. I loved those girls! Hehehee.... The Oreo thing didn't last too long though.

Pount is I think children's dentists are probably more sensitive to children and parents' needs.

Valium IS a commonly used intravenous sedative. Given orally, its effectiveness is much less predictable. In general, properly administered, IV sedation is safer than oral sedation, since in the event of a problem, an IV line is already open. That means an agent which counters the original drug can easily be administered. However, it looks scarier, and there are certainly people who don't know what they're doing in regard to IV sedation. There are also kids in the world who could readily demonstrate to you why additional sedation is necessary for them.

I'd have to disagree with that statement, at least when it's in blanket terms. As ustwo mentioned, there are times when parents can seriously hinder a procedure. Do all emergency rooms have something to hide as well?

What is the age when parents should start taking their kids to the dentist anyways?

Three and only to get them used to going to the dentist and a quick check.

Thanks. We had asked her doc when she was one and didn't get much of a response from her.

My personal opinon on this.

Sedation is overused in children.

My guess is maybe 20% of the pediatric dentists have NO bussines being pediatric dentists. These are guys who no adult would put up with but can get away with it with kids. Most pedo guys I know are great, but the bad ones stand out.

Sedation is a way of avoiding dealing with children. When I was doing my pedo rotation, I never used sedation once. I also did pedo in a general dental office while in ortho training. Most kids you can talk to as an adult and do ok with. Guys who try to 'ambush' a kid with a needle or pulling a tooth really piss me off. The kid won't trust another dentist again, and when I see adults who are afraid of the dentist its almost ALWAYS due to a bad experiance as a kid.

Hell not long ago I had a parent tell me that the local group practice wanted to give NO2 to a 15 year old for a normal filling. The kid was not afraid and had no reason for it. When I was doing my pedo training, my section had a guy who didn't do sedation and we had no problems. The other side was a instructor who had ALL of the kids on NO2, and his personality put him in that 20% who shouldn't be pediatric dentists.

That being said there are reasons for sedation. IV sedation is not done lightly and normally reserved for difficult children. Some kids NEED the work and behavior wise its not possible to work on them. Also while most parents do not want sedation a sizable minority do want it, and almost insist upon it.

I have no facts to this story as none have been given beyond the coma, but I'm sure there is more too it.

I'm nearly 20 and if I have to sit through getting a filling, I try to get it. Not because it scares me or bothers me, it's just that if I'm going to sit there for 20-30 minutes having them screwing around with my teeth I might as well get relaxed and zone out.

Not on a 15 year old who has no use for it. Plus I don't believe in using NO2 as a practice builder for people who want to get stoned but thats another issue.

My mom was never allowed back with me as a child... and I had to have all but 2 baby teeth pulled because they wouldnt loosen up. At one point I was in so much pain that they had 4 people hold me down to extract a molar. This of course resulted in a horrid fear of dentists that caused me to not go go back for over 11 years.

Thankfully when I did go back to a dentist I only had one cavity and have a much better dentist now that I like. :)

If I had kids I would go back with them or they wouldnt work on my child. In my humble opinion a dentist that wont allow a parent with their child to keep them calm must be hiding something. Such as the terrible bedside manner that mine had and/or the lack of charachter to let a child in pain scream and cry rather than give them another shot.

Except that, and I'm sure Ustwo will back me up on this, anesthesia is inherently dangerous and can go badly - as we can see from this story. It's not a good idea to be put under unless you NEED to be put under. If they're doing open-heart surgery on me, yeah, I kinda wanna be knocked out. But if it's not absolutely necessary, I'll take a local thank you.

more details than the original OP article.

Thanks for those details.

I understand that doctors/dentists don't want parents in the rooms if they are going to be disruptive. But what about those parents that just sit there quietly and give silent support to their children? Can't a doctor let the parents stay, and if they cause a problem, then ask them to leave?

If my daughter was going under sedation, I'd want to be in the room with her.

I feel for those parents. I hope they get some answers as to what happened to their little girl.

UPDATE

CHICAGO - A 5-year-old Chicago girl who never awoke from her sedation during a visit to the dentist died Wednesday at Children's Memorial Hospital, a hospital official said.

Kindergartner Diamond Brownridge had been in a coma and on life support since the weekend dentist visit, said Julie Pesch, a spokeswoman for Children's Memorial Hospital.

Family members have said Diamond received a triple dose of sedatives — an oral agent, an intravenous drug and nitrous oxide gas — during Saturday's exam at Little Angel Dental. The girl was having two cavities filled and caps placed on her lower front teeth.

The girl's mother, Ommettress Travis, has said she was asked to leave the room during the half-hour procedure. When she returned, her daughter was lying in the dental chair, not breathing, Travis said.

The girl's dentist, Hicham Riba, was certified to administer anesthesia to patients and his state license was current, said Susan Hofer, a spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.

Speaking to the Chicago Sun-Times before the girl died, the 40-year-old Riba said he was traumatized by what happened. "I don't think I will ever go back to a normal life after an experience like this," he said.

The telephone rang unanswered at Riba's home Wednesday night.



I wonder how this will pan out? My thoughts to the family in coping with their loss. :(

foul......

A quick note to the people freaking out over not being in the room, and insisting that it's nonsense the mom wasn't in the room, or that you'll be in the room for forever from now on:

She'd have died anyway. You wouldn't have changed anything.

What are you hoping you'd have done? Know better than the doctor with a license in anesthesia? Tell him to stop because you know better than he does?

This is reactionary posturing. There's nothing she could, or would, have done if she was in that room.

Also, to the "3 sedatives sounds like a bit much"... "sedatives" is a very broad word, especially when talking to the general public. Not everything called a "sedative" literally means it puts you to sleep. Some intravenous sedatives simply allow you to relax, like an anti-anxiety drug. Anti-anxiety drugs are often used for sedative purposes, but would not necessarily compound the reduction in the rate of breathing caused by the NO2. Also, children go into respiratory arrest far easier and more frequently than adults do. I am hoping, for the sake of this doctor and the family of the girl, that they find out it was a reaction to something she was given, that could not have been known beforehand.

The ONLY hope would have been if the parent was paying attention to the breathing like a hawk. Given the everyday nature of the events prior to the accident, I doubt very highly that she'd have caught it soon enough for the effects to have been reversible.

The true nature of the story is, she was administered an overdose of anesthesia which stopped her breathing. Even if the mother had noticed the breathing had stopped a little sooner if she'd been in the room AND paying enough diligent attention, the damage would still have been done.

I'm not yelling, or being mean. I'm pointing out the glaring logical fallacy that is causing paranoia and a lot of posturing to go on in here. Calm down. Thank you.

I was asked to comment here so I will.

First off, it's nearly impossible to do so with so little info. What's on ABC News most definitely isn't the whole story. It might seem to most people that IV sedation or general anesthesia is nuts for a 5 year old kid but I can tell you that it's an extremely common procedure. At my institution there are ~20 kids/day given general anesthesia to get dental work done. Some normal kids, some handicapped who just won't tolerate seeing a dentist. It's all very standard and very safe when you consider how many are done and how infrequently tragedy happens.

Was the dentist trained for this? Yes. He had to be by law.

Was too much given? Impossible to say without knowing the details.

Why are 5 year old kids getting crowns? Because they don't brush and have bad habits like going to bed with a bottle. It's way too common.

Should parents be allowed in the operatory? I don't know. It sounds like UsTwo is an orthodontist so he has way more experience dealing with kids than I do. My patients are at the opposite end of the spectrum.

I think that everyone should hesitate before making harsh judgements here. As someone else pointed out before, few here are qualified to pass judgement. What sounds outrageous to you is actually pretty normal procedure. Just keep your kids brushing and importantly, do not show fear of the dentist in front of your kids. That's how they learn to fear it themselves.

Very well said. Kids take their cues on how to react from their parents. If you're all anxiety-stricken over what's going on, you will pass that down to the child.

When I did my EMT rounds, I had a 12 year old girl who passed out in the shower (for a variety of bad medical reasons I won't bother with detailing). The girl was fair to poor, but stable, while we interviewed her, but mom started freaking out when we started to backboard her. The poor girl's vitals started shooting through the roof- her respirations went way up suddenly, she started getting very anxious, and her pressure increased dramatically. I had to tell her to calm down for her daughter, because she was making her very nervous and I needed for that little girl to stay very calm in her condition.

Thankfully, mom calmed down (with the help of dad standing with her) and the girl's numbers all went back to where they were. Talking to her calmly in the back of the ambulance, assuring her that we were doing everything we could to make her feel better, her vitals perked up a bit.

I was told this by every Paramedic I rode with, that a lot of parents do not understand how much their children understand, and how much their reaction is based on your reaction.

It was reported in this morning's Star Ledger that the child has died. The dentist wascertified to administer anesthesia and his license was current . No further details were given.

Point well taken. The outcome would have surely been the same. I think I'd want to be in there for moral support for my daughter. I would not expect to know more than the expert. I know my daughter would be scared to be sedated. I would stand quietly on the side, just to be there while the sedation was taking place. I'd probably leave while the doctor was doing the procedure because I'd get queasy watching. I would also want to be there when she woke up. I remember getting my wisdom teeth extracted. My mom stayed with me until I was sedated and was there when I woke up. It was greatly appreciated. (Thanks Mom!)

I feel bad for the family as well as that doctor. I can't imagine how he feels.

I've seen this on ride outs too, and watched entire documentaries on the matter. Children immitate their parents, especially when it comes to negative emotions. They take their cues from their parents how to react, so the calmer you can be, in theory, the calmer they should be, in theory.

My meeting got moved a week, so no new info will be forthcoming.

I disagree. The mother FOUND the kid on her side, not breathing. That tells us she wasn't being closely monitored. Fine, but if mom's in the room she's not going to be monitoring the patient one chair over, she's gonna be monitoring her kid. There's an excellent chance that mom would have seen the kid stop breathing and would have raised the alarm. Would it have been in time? We'll never know, but kinda sucks to have that question hanging in the air, doesn't it.

It's possible, yes. Their only hope would have been that she'd noticed the lack of breathing within the first couple of minutes, and the doctor had been alerted to start CPR, awaiting the arrival of an ambulance.

Really, though, the "what ifs" make it impossible to know for sure- and it's ridiculous for paranoia to prevail when we don't yet know exactly what caused the problem in the first place.

The thing that does bother me in general, however, is that there was not even a blood pressure cuff in the facility, let alone a heart monitor.

Analog has spelled it out very well. My question is, WTF was the dentist, who is supposedly certified in sedation of this type, doing working without a pulse oximeter? That's standard of care.

I believe the expert they consulted called it a "finger monitor" in an earlier post.

That alone would likely have prevented the girl's death. Monitoring her most likely would have, too.

Admittedly I wasn't there, but these two things scream out at me.

Well the mother said he didn't have one and then later said 'they put the thing on her finger and there was no plus' that thing would have been a pulse oximeter.

So in other words we need to wait for details.

Hmmm. My first trip to the dentist was when I was 25. I still try to put off my yearly checkup as long as possible until someone in my family insists that I go, because going to the dentist is one of my least favorite things. Hell, physical therapy was more pleasant than a visit to the dentist.

It's a good thing, though, because it means I didn't have to have braces like all the other kids with crooked teeth did. Dodged a bullet there.

I don't think I'd want to be in the dentist's office with my child. I can't stand to see people I love in pain, especially when there's nothing I can do about it.

Gilda

Phobia - A phobia (from the Greek φόβος "fear"), is a strong, persistent fear of situations, objects, activities, or persons. The main symptom of this disorder is the excessive, unreasonable desire to avoid the feared subject.

They should have been monitoring blood pressure and breathing if they were giving IV medications.

IV medication is not necessary for such a procedure, especially with the Nitrous Oxide AND a local anethetic. My daughter had a filling done when she was 4 yrs old and never had IV medication. Granted a cap is not necessarily a 'filling' but should not require much more medication. DEFINATELY not without monitoring.

My daughter's dentist gives me a form to sign stating what procedures he will be using and if any restraints will be used. I am required to sign the form agreeing to the medications, procedures, and practices. I know my daughter's dentist very well as I used to go to the same dentist. I don't go into the office with her but I know I don't need to.

Research your dentist, KNOW what will be happening in your dentist's office, and only agree to what you are comfortable with. There's no reason to panic about not being IN the office with him. If there is any complication, unless you are trained as a first responder, there's probably little that a parent could do besides panic or cause distraction.

This dentist was not as careful as he should have been. It does not mean that the parent should have insisted on staying in the room, as was said already, there's likely little she could have done.

We still are not sure of that. I'm not giving the guy a pass, but I'm not going to set the hounds on him quite yet either. He had all the needed certifications, I can't IMAGINE he didn't have the proper equipment. Now perhaps he didn't use it, perhaps he is a quack, but convicting someone in the court of public opinion with almost no data isn't fair. He's already been ruined by it and will most likely have to move states, or even not practice for a while until the pressure dies down even if he is 100% innocent and did everything 100% correctly.

Once again, the TFP mob is ready to draw and quarter someone based on hearsay, limited evidence and sheer anger over a tragedy.

And again, there are a limited number of people on this board with the knowledge and experience to be critical of the use of anethesia at all in this case. I'm not one of them, and neither are the vast majority of the posters on this thread.

According to the info that Cynthetiq posted "WMAQ reported Monday that the office had no heart monitor or blood pressure cuff, instruments that are required by Illinois law when sedation is involved." In my opinion that is not being careful enough. He may have had the correct lisences but he was not careful enough because he did not monitor her closely enough.

WMAQ = local news idiots

The mother said 'they put that thing on her finger and she had no pulse', well that thing would be a pulse oximeter, so my guess is there is more to it. Hell every dental student gets a blood pressure cuff. Now maybe they didn't USE them which is just as bad, but obviously the story isn't 100% factual. For legal reasons I'm sure the dentist isn't telling his story to the press until the lawyers have their say, as much as he may want to.

Somewhere on this board we have a thread about peoples dealing with the press and how fucked up the stories were that came out vrs what really happened, I don't see how this would be any different.

I can see where you are coming from. I know news stories can be screwed up by leaving out important bits to give a bad impression, using ONLY the facts wanted. I don't think the news people could say this statement if it wasn't true. If he did not use a blood pressure cuff or heart monitor than there was a lack of care. If he did use those things at all, then could the new people say that he didn't?? It would be false to say that he didn't and could be called slander or false reporting, or a number of other things. Now I would like to see WMAQ's actual report. Since it was quoted from another report, could that statement be something that WMAQ quoted from the mother who was lying?? In that case WMAQ wouldn't be lying but would be only quoting a participant of the story. I can see there being a question if that is the case. I am eager to see the final result of this story.

I'm curious as to why the mother was let back into the room and the child just lying on her side?? Why would the staff not have checked on things and called assistance ASAP when they were finished?? Why didn't they check her vitals? And if they did, why was the the MOTHER to discover there was something wrong when the staff should have already known it? Something still doesn't sound right, even if the staff had the monitoring tools necessary.

I agree something doesn't sound right, and the guy may be guilty of malpractice and killing the kid through neglagence but I know how these things go.

I was once accused by a mother of leaving the room while the kid was choking. The witness was whoever it was who took him to me that visit prior. Well the kid did choke (he was very afraid and I dropped a band which got the gag reflex going) it wasn't a big deal I was there with him the whole time, and other than him being very nervous nothing bad happened. Well next time the mom comes in and accuses me and the KID says thats not what happened to the mom and then the mom accused me of getting the kid to lie. Now that was a nothing incident, just think if something bad did happen, how that story could be twisted.

So needless to say I'm not going to take anything said at anyones word.

Although the rest of your post was good, the above reveals an ignorance of the subject. There's just no other way to put it.

I defy you to quote any knowledgeable expert who says dental restorations can be done on ANY child with no more than N2O and a local.

Yeah... that's pretty much the only way to put it... nicely... or at least, not mean...

I think we're just trying to respectfully point out how irresponsible it is to assert single, unique, unrelated experiences as general, absolute fact.

It doesn't look good for the dentist. Not that it bothers me, since it certainly appears that he was negligent.

An appropriate comment here would be that a dental office death is news BECAUSE it's so rare. Most of them do a very good job.

(Can you link to AOL articles?)

This version has some different details

Looks like he may have been guilty, but again, I don't know how much of this was investigation or percautionary. I'll let you know if I find out anything not listed here.

Hey, Ustwo or popo, when they say IV sedation, are they talking about an open line with a drip and a stand and all that? Or do they mean an injection? Not that I guess it matters all that much from a technical standpoint, but calling an injected sedative an "IV" makes it seem much more complicated and scary to the lay newspaper reader.

I have noticed that some people are so willing to blame us, the general public, for our reactions to this tragedy.

Herein lies the problem in my opinion..... A degree doth not a genius make.

Too much college knowledge and not enough common sense can kill.

That many injections plus pills would easily kill a child of 35 pounds. Even with my few years in the medical field and NO degree in medicine I know this.

Go ahead and crucify me.

I will go on record as saying they did not give oral Valium after giving IV Valium. That doesn't make sense.

I agree 100% but the article says injection or iv PLUS pills PLUS gas...

That was what I based my last post on.
"She said Diamond received a triple dose of sedatives - an oral agent, an intravenous drug and nitrous oxide gas - during her treatment."

I base my opinion on the criteria normally used to dictate whether sedation should be used. The number of forms of sedation that the dentist used is unusual unless there are a few specific criteria involved.

1. Can't relax or calm down enough for treatment to be performed safely, even with conscious sedation and other behavior management techniques in order for treatment to be performed safely.
2. Needs oral surgery or other dental treatment that would be difficult for the child to tolerate while awake.
3. Needs a lot of dental work that can best be done in one long appointment rather than many shorter visits.
4. Has a medical, physical or emotional disability that limits his or her ability to understand directions and be treated safely in an outpatient setting.

According to the artical there were none of those things outlined as being an issue. The mother left the room and did not complain in the interviews mentioned of her daughter being undully distressed about it. The daughter was described as being good in school so was probably not mentally retarded to the point of not understanding what was happening. A common cap is not normally an extremely difficult procedure with local anesthetic and the article said it was due to ONE cavity so the length of procedure should not have been especially long.

In the case described in the article it would be unusual for that level of sedation to be necessary. As I mentioned and as others mentioned, I'm sure there is much more to the situation than is told in the news.

If the dentist truely was using 3 forms of sedation, I would be surprised if anyone would say that he did not need to have had an anethesiologist attending.

Oral agent doesn't mean pills, necessarily. Most likely, they mean an injected local anesthetic. This is the kind where they use the machine with the needle tip to tap into the soft tissue inside your mouth and pump an oral numbing agent into it to affect the area of the mouth in which they're working.

And once again, go back to what I said before... "sedative" is a very broad word, medically. There are a lot of drugs that one could unofficially refer to as a "sedative", having nothing to do with all 3 literally meaning "something that puts you to sleep".

Like I said, "an oral agent" almost never means pills. Also, what "that many injections"? There was an IV line. I don't know where you're getting "that many injections" from. And no, none of us "know this". Go ahead and argue with people who have licenses in the field, who are saying there's not enough info to say anything definitive. We don't even know what drugs, specifically, she received. So no, I have to respectfully point out that you do not "know" this, sorry to say.

Really though... why would you post what you posted after 2 pages of people speculating, but then saying "there's no way of knowing because there isn't enough information"- some of them people in general medical fields (and licensed), at least one of which in the very field this story deals with? Just seems like you're trying to be inflammatory or controversial on purpose. *shrug*

I never had my parents in the room when I had major dental surgery, dunno why just never did. I guess it depends on the dentist and their possible reputation. Ours had been around for a couple decades so he knew what was up, don't go to a storefront dental place next time? I guess kids these days don't brush their teeth too well if they need caps by 5. Oh my, what is the world coming to...

Almost always done that way, that wasn't the problem. To someone without a degree who thinks they know better I'm sure it seems a lot :D Seriously though don't assume you know better until you do some research into it. A degree doesn't mean all that much, but it shows you at least have a backround in the field. If you go by what a reporter tells you, and reporters seem to be reporters because they are unqualifed to do anything practical, you are asking to be missled.

I'm not a true sedation expert, I haven't used it since dental school, but IV was almost always a drip of some kind. The benifit being if there is an emergency you can quickly change doses or give another medication.

Dentist's license suspended... up to $40,000 in fines.

Fucking dirtbag. Careless, careless, careless dirtbag.

$40,000 for killing a 5 year old girl? Seems cheap... though the fines aren't the real problem... the family will fleece him in court.

So there you go. Now we know what she was given.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15091116/

Don't be hasty. We could save some tax dollars if we let him practice dentistry while he's intered in prison. Not that he'll see a single day...but it's worth a thought.

Don't say something like 'she would have died anyway if the Mom was in the room'. You don't know that!

and that's a perfect reason why little kids shouldn't be taking that stuff unless they're being monitored and in a hospital...

I was always overly careful with my kids and what was medically done to them. Yes they might get a little anxious in certain situations, but I know they have a lot of common sense and would not allow anyone to put them in a dangerous situation unless absolutely necessary and in the right environment.

First of all... we are not children. There is no need to yell your opinion at me. Chill out.

And as I stated before, the "what ifs" in favor of the girl, had the mother stayed, are impossible to pin down to any kind of positive end. That was my guess at the time, based on what little info was available. Now we know she was almost certainly given a lethal combination of drugs, along with the lack of monitoring equipment. Had the mom been in the room, the monitoring equipment still wouldn't have been used, and she'd still in all reasonable likelihood have died.

And again, if you want to play "what ifs", I can easily say that if the mom stayed, the girl took her last breath as her mom walked out of the room just to pay the bill, which could take way more than long enough (only takes 4 minutes without oxygen) for brain damage to occur- and after 6 minutes, brain death begins. I don't know about you, but i've never paid a bill in under 5 minutes at the dentist.

I stand by what I said. The "what ifs" that create a narrative in which the girl lives would be built on a series of multiple leaps of magnificent coincidence. Too many variables would have to have fallen in line perfectly for her to have lived. On the contrary, only one step in any "what if" is required to cause the unfortunate narrative we're now discussing.

Hospital is unnecessary, as these are professionals licensed to perform these procedures, and they happen constantly, all over the country. Also, no one is arguing that they shouldn't be monitored- the law demands it. I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

...*shakes head*...what in the hell are you talking about? Being put in a dangerous situation? What dangerous situation? The kid was lethally overdosed on sedatives. This isn't "look both ways before crossing the street" or "don't talk to strangers" territory... this is a medical practitioner who fucked up in dosing anesthesia for a 35-pound, 5-year-old girl and didn't use the appropriate equipment to tell if things were going awry.

This has absolutely nothing, whatsoever, to do with a kid having common sense, or not allowing themselves to be put in a dangerous situation. Frankly, I'm flabbergasted.

I am happy, though, because we both share some common ground on this issue... we both have no idea what you're talking about.

While I understand not wanting parents in the room while you work (offically I'm working and have 2 parents in the room as I type this) IF she had been there the monitoring equipment MAY have been used. If this guy was cutting corners, he may be less likely to do so if someone was watching, even if that someone doesn't know the procedure.

I think that one important fact that's been overlooked is that the mother is a healthcare professional herself. I think she may be a physician's assistant, but I honestly can't remember her exact title. Regardless, the implication in the initial story is that she has the training to monitor the doctor and his actions (or lack thereof).

As far as the statement about anesthesia only being administered in a hospital with monitoring equipment, that's just shortsited. I had minor surgery at a surgery center in downtown Chicago 3 years ago that's 4 blocks from my office. It was a nice walk over, and it's nowhere near a hospital. As long as someone has the equipment, training and license to correctly administer the anethesia, they should be allowed to do so wherever they deem appropriate.

I won't be surprised to find out that this dentist has some sort of "issue" going on right now, like a substance abuse problem. That seems to be the usual cause of big mistakes like this one, at least in my experience. My office does professional insurance for guys who make big mistakes (and pay big premiums).

Actually... A friends sister died ina Dentist office. She was in for a root canal, and had an allergic reaction to the shot she was given. Since it was in the Dr.'s office they weren't equiped to deal with the serverity of the situation... :( But that's a topic for another discussion....

As for my children, they are never out of my site. If a Dentist or Dr. wouldn't let me in the same room (except for x-rays where I waited outside the door) I would leave with my daughter, and find someone else. I have even brought my younger daughter with me, when my older daughter was having blood drawn. The girls, and I :), are always well behaved, and I have not run into a situation where they have frowned on my following on me being in the room.

On the flip side I have a friend that almost died eating pasta due to an unknown allergic reaction (still unknown) and was saved by a dental office next door with an epi-pen.

The densist above should have at least had an epi pen handy.

If the kids are behaved thats fine, but you should see some of the little monsters we deal with :lol:

I was talking about the mother having common sense in this particular case. Certainly not the 5 year old. And now I read she was in the medical field herself. :rolleyes:

I won't have anything medically done if it's not in a medical center or hospital. Doctors are only human and make mistakes. That's how I see it. So to protect myself.....;)

When I first read this article (and posted it), my inital Mother reaction was to never leave my daughter's side. However, this past Wednesday proved to me that thought is not always in the best interest of my daughter.

She had to have a tooth pulled out and was going to get a novacaine shot. While I was in the room, she tried to get out of the chair, screaming she wanted to go home. I left the room. And although my heart was aching for her as she screamed for me not to go, the dentist and assistant were able to calm her down and get the procedure done without a problem. This would not have happened if I stayed. As much as the thought of anything horrible happening to my children gives me much grief, I had to let go.

One thing that can be done when finding a doctor or dentist is to research their credentials. Find out all that you can, so you can feel comfortable having that person perform necessary procedures on you and your children. and ask questions. If they are doing something you are not sure of, ask. If you don't feel comfortable with the answers, find a new doctor. Her dentist was more than willing to answer my questions and I felt I was leaving her in good hands. Then I hugged her real tight when she came out, minus 1 tooth.

I'm assuming they mean she's a tech in the hospital, as any other designation would have an actual title such as nurse, etc.

However, I'd not read that bit before (somehow I'd missed it) and no one had brought that point up until just now (thanks Ustwo).

So, in THIS specific case of the mother's background in exposure to medical procedure, the monitoring equipment would probably have been brought up as a necessity, had the mother insisted she stay and they allowed her.

Now knowing this, I must concede my point, because had this person of medical background stayed, things may very well have turned out better.