Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Anonymous's Latest Target: Boston Children's Hospital

Posted by Soulskill on from the put-down-the-digital-pitchforks dept.

Brandon Butler writes: "Supporters of the faceless collective known as Anonymous have taken up the cause of a young girl, after the State of Massachusetts removed her from her parents earlier this year. However, the methods used to show support may have unintended consequences, which could impact patient care. On Thursday, the Boston Children's Hospital confirmed that they were subjected to multiple DDoS attacks over the Easter holiday. Said attacks, which have continued throughout the week, aim to take the hospital's website offline. Similar attacks, including website defacement, have also targeted the Wayside Youth and Family Support Network. Both organizations are at the heart of a sensitive topic, child welfare and the rights of a parent." Members of Anonymous are now calling for a halt to the attacks.

51 of 329 comments (clear)

  1. That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've worked in healthcare.
    The company I worked for had their services hosted for at a data center. That Data Center also hosted some Banks.
    Groups like anonymous think they are performing some social disobedience by DDoS the banks, Also DDoS the actual Data center. While it took a few minutes for the network to switch over there were a few hundred doctors who couldn't access their software, for that time.

    XKCD described these attacks like vandalizing a bill board. But it is more like vandalizing a bill board by shooting a gun at it, and not knowing who or what is behind it.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sometimes people trip and fall down stairs. Sometimes assholes push people down stairs. That doesn't mean "stairs are bad" nor does it make someone who pushes someone down the stairs any less of an asshole.

    2. Re:That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      So you are expecting every small company to afford a large network infrastructure. A lot of the services you enjoy a rather a cheap price, is due to these data centers.
      The customers who were not hosted didn't go down... However because they ran the software on a PC under the desk, they had 2x the total outages and often lasted for hours, due to poor infrastructure.

      I do blame the "hackers", as they were the ones who went on purpose to damage a computer network. They said to themselves "Self, I am going to do something today that will negatively effect someone else".

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by QuasiSteve · · Score: 3, Informative

      So you are expecting every small company to afford a large network infrastructure

      Not at all - I do expect the large network infrastructure providers to be able to harden themselves against such attacks, especially given their clients.

      Like I said - at least it had a switch-over, so although doctors could not access things for 'minutes' (how many are we talking about anyway?), they should have been mostly unaffected.

      That said - some absolutely critical things should not be placed under the total care of service providers. Would you do away with your HDD/SSD and rely entirely on cloud storage?

    4. Re:That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by cdrudge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you are expecting every small company to afford a large network infrastructure.

      No. But I do expect companies that require their hosted services in order to function have backup plans should the service go down.

      If in this case of the original comment about several hundred doctors not being able to access their information when the banks were under attack...several hundred doctors isn't a small company. That's a large medical organization. Or if whoever was running the service was treating it like an overloaded shared server then they get what they pay for.

    5. Re:That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So like when a woman is drunk and she gets raped, it's her fault. Gotcha.

      You "Don't blame the victim!" people are completely mindless. Do you know what "false dichotomy" means? It is possible for multiple parties to be at fault. It is possible that the victim is an idiot for putting themselves in a situation that a reasonable person would know not to put themselves into. This doesn't really apply in a situation where you're going about your business and someone decides to rape you, but it does in a situation where you choose to use technology you know is insecure, something that puts other people *at risk* no matter how much you whine and cry about how evil other people are.

      And have you ever heard of "negligence," or anything remotely similar to it? Jesus. Get a fucking brain, and drop the "stop blaming the victim" bullshit; it's old and tired, and you have no idea how to use it.

    6. Re:That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by Penguinisto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So like when a woman is drunk and she gets raped, it's her fault. Gotcha.

      Your analogy isn't perfectly correct: It's more like 'If some woman walks into the bad part of town and gets drunk, then proceeds to wander through the streets wearing only a negligee and waving around a bag of condoms while screaming "somebody fuck me!", then she bears some of the liability.

      Before you react - allow me to clarify what GP did not: She gets none of the legal blame (and should never bear any), but reality dictates that you don't go wandering into a pit of starving bears wearing only a loincloth made of steaks.

      Similarly, setting up services in a shared datacenter means you should know up-front the risks of doing so (accidentally cut fiber, datacenter management fuckup, FBI ICE seizure, DDoS, carrier fuckups, etc), and if your services are critical, you damned sure need to plan/mitigate accordingly.

      Essentially what you're saying is asshats like Anonymous don't have to take personal responsibility for their actions because their victims were asking for it.

      No, GP did not. What he did say was that if you don't know the (pretty damned obvious) risks and mitigations of going into something, then you shouldn't be considered competent enough to do it, and therefore should not do it.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    7. Re:That is why social Hacking is Bad MmmKaa. by Qzukk · · Score: 2

      But some people NEED to be pushed down stairs, so it doesn't always make the pusher an asshole.

      Nobody NEEDS to be pushed down stairs.

      They should be shoved.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  2. Re:What we would like to know by Tucan · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is the story:

    http://www.slate.com/articles/...

  3. which could impact patient care by frovingslosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Attacks to a website could impact patient care? If there is any truth at all to this (which I really doubt) then people should be made aware of it immediately. Thanks Anonymous, I really want to know if I'm going to get patient care at a hospital where that care could be compromised just by a problem on their website.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:which could impact patient care by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, it could.

      1. Most hospitals are operating at a loss, thus do not have money to maintain a strong infrastructure. Meaning that website could be on the same pipe as the rest of the organization.

      2. The web sites now offer more services to patients and other providers. Such as logging in and able to send their Medical Records, Book and Appointment, or securely send a message to your doctor.

      3. If you kill the Router (That devices that will need to direct you to the website) as the device wouldn't expect that type of load, it causes problems with other places it is trying to work with. As the software will often need to talk to other locations. For example Lab work is often done at different locations then sent over to your Dr. for review. If the network goes down the Dr. may not get the results.

      In short you do not know how things are connected, and could be combined with other things that you don't expect.

      To say, It is only a website doesn't mean DDoS the site will not cause other problems.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:which could impact patient care by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Informative

      1. Children's hospitals receive donations and nail research grants with an alarming deftness. Boston Children's Hospital is, according to their own architecture, the best. There's no shortage of money. They did have some layoffs a couple of years ago, but with a ridiculous savings ratio (255 jobs, costing 89.5 million annually, constituting somewhere in the neighbourhood of 3% of their budget.)

      2. Their primary website is located at 134.174.13.251 (childrenshospital.org). Patient info retrieval is hosted on 134.174.13.5 (apps.childrenshospital.org). There is a booking form located on the main site, but at any rate it's working just fine now.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    3. Re:which could impact patient care by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

      Yes, it could.

      1. Most hospitals are operating at a loss, thus do not have money to maintain a strong infrastructure. Meaning that website could be on the same pipe as the rest of the organization.

      One would think that HIPAA would nix that idea. I could be wrong, but patient records on the same direct wiring as the public Internet? I'd not only fire the architect, I'd have the SOB castrated to insure that his stupidity didn't pass on to any future progeny. It ain't that expensive to buy a decent pair of firewalls and segment things out.

      2. The web sites now offer more services to patients and other providers. Such as logging in and able to send their Medical Records, Book and Appointment, or securely send a message to your doctor.

      So do banking sites (money transfers, billpay, etc), which often run even leaner than hospitals (at least the smaller banks and credit unions do) - they also know enough that a breach on their site could send them to insolvency, so they plan and spend appropriately. You;d think that a hospital, who stands to literally kill people if their stuff is breached, would do the same. Please let me know which ones do not, so I can avoid ever using their services.

      3. If you kill the Router (That devices that will need to direct you to the website) as the device wouldn't expect that type of load, it causes problems with other places it is trying to work with.

      *cough*port channels*cough*vlans*cough*ACLs*cough*...

      As the software will often need to talk to other locations. For example Lab work is often done at different locations then sent over to your Dr. for review. If the network goes down the Dr. may not get the results.

      ...which is why the humble fax machine and telephone still exists: Call lab, lab sends fax, etc...

      Long story short - even on a budget, if it's important, there are workarounds.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    4. Re:which could impact patient care by maccodemonkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      1. Children's hospitals receive donations and nail research grants with an alarming deftness. Boston Children's Hospital is, according to their own architecture, the best. There's no shortage of money. They did have some layoffs a couple of years ago, but with a ridiculous savings ratio (255 jobs, costing 89.5 million annually, constituting somewhere in the neighbourhood of 3% of their budget.)

      Having income is not the same thing as having money. Hospitals and medical care is expensive, especially in the US. It looks like that job cut was due to a $150 million budget shortfall.

    5. Re:which could impact patient care by sessamoid · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, non-profit hospitals are, in many cases, a sham. Yes, the "hospital" is losing money, while all the doctors working there are pulling in substantial incomes at the same time.

      Are you suggesting that those doctors, nurses, technicians should all work for free?

      Regardless, what the physicians make has little to do with how the hospital fares. In the US, hospitals rarely employ physicians. Hospitals are just one of the places where doctors go to take care of patients. There's usually little financial linkage between the two.

      --
      "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
    6. Re:which could impact patient care by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Glassdoor suggests that the doctors working there aren't making all that much money, and a quick google around suggests that the top administrator is not all that well-paid in terms of the hospital's gross income.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. Re:What we would like to know by rhsanborn · · Score: 3, Informative

    We can't know the details, because releasing them would be a violation of patient health information privacy laws. So we only get to hear the story from the side of the parents. We do know the physicians at the hospital have diagnosed the child with medical child abuse. A key point form the Slate article someone else linked is that 1 in 10 children who are abused medically, die. It isn't something that is taken lightly.

  5. Unbelievable and disgusting abuse of state power by cold+fjord · · Score: 3, Informative

    I heard about it on the radio a couple of weeks ago. This case is an absolutely appalling abuse of power.

    Advocates Fight for Justina Pelletier, Teen Held by State in Psych Ward

    One day Justina Pelletier was a seemingly healthy teenager performing jumps and spirals at a skating show and six weeks later, on Feb. 10, 2013, she was in the emergency room at Children's Hospital in Boston after a severe bout with the flu, refusing to eat and barely able to walk.

    Her parents, Lou and Linda Pelletier of West Hartford, Conn., say their daughter was diagnosed and being treated at Tufts Medical Center for mitochondrial disease, a rare genetic disorder with physical symptoms that can affect every part of the body. Justina's sister Jessica, 25, is also being treated for the disease.

    But three days later, a team of doctors at Boston Children's said her symptoms were psychosomatic, according to the family. The hospital then filed a complaint with the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, as required by law, because they suspected the parents of child abuse for subjecting their daughter to invasive medical treatments and denying her mental health therapy. ... more

    Pelletier Family Files Habeas Corpus Pleading, Points Out Disturbing Facts About Boston Children’s Hospital

    ... Among other things, the Petition also argues that the requirement to issue detailed written findings of fact and conclusions of law justifying DCF’s intervention has never been met. Never has the juvenile court issued such required findings of fact or conclusions of law.

    “This case comes down to the simple fact that new doctors at Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH), who had no experience with Justina, came up with a different diagnosis than her expert treating physicians at Tufts Medical Center,” said Staver. “The state cannot take children from their parents when the parents make reasonable choices for their medical care. This case is outrageous,” said Staver. .... Justina has gone from a competitive figure skater to being confined to a wheelchair,” said Staver.

    Fourteen months ago, Justina, now fifteen years old, was seized by Massachusetts DCF after her parents, at the direction of Dr. Mark Korson, took her to Boston Children’s Hospital to see Dr. Alejandro Flores, a gastroenterologist who had previously treated Justina when he worked at Tufts Medical Center before he transferred to BCH. Dr. Korson, Chief of Metabolic Services at Tufts Medical Center, was Justina’s primary physician who was treating her for Mitochondrial disease. Instead of allowing Justina to see Dr. Flores, Justina saw Dr. Jurriaan Peters, a BCH resident only seven months out of medical school. He brought in Dr. Simona Bujoreanu, a psychologist who coauthored an article in which she contends that in up to 50% of children who present with physical complaints, the complaints are not physical but mental. Without consulting with Dr. Korson or Flores, Dr. Bujoreanu rendered a diagnosis of Somatoform disorder. Without a thorough review of her care, she opined that Justina’s physical complaints were mental, not physical. BCH then presented the family with a new treatment plan to discontinue all medical care and medications and which forbade any second opinions. When the parents refused to sign the new treatment plan and requested that Justina be discharged so they could take her back to Tufts Medical Center, BCH called DCF, and DCF prevented the family from discharging Justina

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  6. Re:What we would like to know by greyparrot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would like to see the followup on this story. Did she do better after being removed from her parents? That would be the test, in part, for Munchausen. The whole thing has become very political.

  7. Re:Of course he is by BiIl_the_Engineer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Blame the victim is popular on Slashdot.

    You know what else is popular? Playing the "You're blaming the victim!" card, and doing it in a way that's utterly absurd. I know you can't fathom how it's possible that *multiple people* can be at fault for something, or that you could say that the victim should have taken reasonable measures to prevent the Bad Thing from happening (In situations where this is reasonable and possible, of course.) without saying that the attacker is blameless or deserves no punishment, but it is possible.

    Funnily enough, he even said: "It's all good and well to blame the 'hackers' - and they should be".

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
  8. Re:What we would like to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The family's own doctor selected a course of treatment _without_ performing the standard diagnostic test to indicate the condition. Also, this family went forum-shopping for a doctor until they found one that gave the diagnosis they wanted.

    On the surface this looks like a classic case of Münchausen syndrome by proxy. Other clues--the hospital said that the girl seemed less tense when her parents weren't around.

    I was taken away from my alcoholic mother for a year. I met two other kids (brother and sister) while in foster care whose parents pimped them out.

    It's a drastic measure to take kids away from their parents, but the kids will survive, whether it turns out to have been warranted or not. Calm the f* down.

  9. Re:What we would like to know by wiredlogic · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It seems odd that she still hasn't had a muscle biopsy to confirm the diagnosis because of concerns over pain and anesthesia even though she's already had surgery to insert a port into her digestive tract.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  10. Re:What we would like to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    The doctor diagnosed her with an actual physical illness without running the tests needed to diagnose her. Boston Children's Hospital did some of those tests, and they indicated that she probably didn't have it.

    They said her parents were medically abusing her because they took her to a large number of doctors and appeared to be doing forum-shopping until they found a diagnosis they liked - mitochondrial disease is claimed by roughly 50% of parents who are ultimately found guilty of medical abuse. Her parents also had a port installed in her digestive tract, which was fairly risky (due to the surgery and increased chance of infection until it's removed) and wouldn't have helped with her disease, if it was real.

  11. Adolescent script kiddies by jopet · · Score: 2, Informative

    Some probably adolescent script kiddies with an ego by far exceeding their intelligence try to play digital lynch mob.
    What pathetic little cunts.
    Not for the first time showing how much worse than individual stupidity their collective stupditiy can be.

    1. Re:Adolescent script kiddies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You have no idea. I ran with Anonymous before they became "hacktivists" (back when they were still doing POOL'S CLOSED, etc). Encyclopedia Dramatica had a picture of one of the raids on Habbo I participated in - I think the newer incarnation of it still does (I was the guy copy-pasting Clarence Carter's "Strokin'" over and over again). Back then, Anonymous raided PURELY to screw with people and get a reaction. It wasn't about activism, it wasn't about "changing things" or trying to fight perceived injustices. It was about hearing Hal Turner (pre-arrest) scream himself hoarse on the radio after the tenth caller in a row started playing the Fresh Prince themesong over the phone, or sending people thousands of empty USPS boxes.

      The real split (though I think this is well-known history at this point) came when Anonymous started attacking Scientology. There were those of us who were doing it for laughs, who did the whole "WE DO NOT FORGIVE WE DO NOT FORGET" thing purely as a joke, and were basically just a group of people from 4Chan's /b/ who had nothing better to do.

      The current incarnation of Anonymous are the people who started taking that joke seriously and decided to venture into hacking (even though as far as I know, Anonymous actually has only a few real hackers), DDoS, and other script kiddie stuff. I personally left because I knew that at that point, the level of what Anonymous was doing had gone from (relatively) harmless trolling to things that could get people arrested. Plenty of other people thought the same way. I'm willing to bet that very few, if any, of the current people in Anonymous trace their roots back to the Habbo raids, or to 4Chan at all, and that's because all of the people who were around for the Habbo raids were the ones who were smart enough to leave when things started getting serious.

      The only real Anonymous is the one on 4Chan. The new group are just using the name.

  12. What about Justina? by BBF_BBF · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's been a year now since Justina was removed from her parents.

    It should be painfully obvious if her health issues were as a result of her parents' psychological pressure since she hasn't been under their influence for over a year. So why don't any of the "advocates" fighting for the parents actually show us how Justina's doing now?

    If Justina is FINE now, then it would be quite obvious that the Doctors at the Boston Children's Hospital were correct. If she's still suffering from the same symptoms, then the parents have a much stronger case.

    1. Re:What about Justina? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      She is not fine, in fact she is degrading. Her hair is falling out and she can no longer even walk.

    2. Re:What about Justina? by psm321 · · Score: 3, Informative

      They do... if you review any of the available information on the case it's obvious that she is both physically and psychologically much worse off now. Wheelchair-bound instead of ice-skating and smuggling notes begging to be taken out and saying "I feel like I'm in jail". BCH and the judge messed up (possibly with good intentions at first) and now are perpetuating their mistake to try to cover it up.

  13. "State takes custody of teenage girl" by Onuma · · Score: 2

    If she were my child, there would be no way I would let them stop me from getting her back. If paperwork and appeals didn't do the trick, I would very quickly escalate the actions I took to ensure her safety and care under my responsibility. That might mean intimidation or violence...so be it. They threw the first stone.

    The State has absolutely no reason to take these parents' child from them.

    --
    What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
    1. Re:"State takes custody of teenage girl" by TC+Wilcox · · Score: 2

      If she were my child, there would be no way I would let them stop me from getting her back. If paperwork and appeals didn't do the trick, I would very quickly escalate the actions I took to ensure her safety and care under my responsibility. That might mean intimidation or violence...so be it. They threw the first stone. The State has absolutely no reason to take these parents' child from them.

      I agree with you that that The State had no reason to take the child, but be careful. The State views those that use violence against it as the most vile criminals and would not hesitate to have you thrown in prison. If you are in prison how can you help your child?

  14. Re:Unbelievable and disgusting abuse of state powe by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

    Munchausen by proxy? That would be tough since they have so little access to her. If anything this is Munchausen by state agency.

    Why she has gotten progressively worse in state care over the last year plus? Might that be a sign that treating a physical ailment by psychological means may be ... "ineffective"?

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  15. Re:Of course he is by spire3661 · · Score: 2

    The price of Freedom is eternal vigilance, so is the price of hosting services on the internet. Hell i have to keep a close eye on my personal NAS, i get about 5 attempts to hack every single day. Also DDOS isnt breaking into anyones house, its a million people ringing your doorbell to the point no one else can ring it.

    --
    Good-bye
  16. Already affecting patients by Cobalt+Jacket · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My son is a child with fragile health, and we associate with many other, similar families as a support mechanism. While I am not in the Boston area, we do know families that are there, and who frequent Boston Children's. One of them that we associate with let everyone in one of these support groups know that the patient scheduling system had been affected by the Anonymous operation, and so she was unable to schedule her son's surgery. Boston Children's needs to keep their clinical systems more protected, but the bottom line is that Anonymous is filled with grade-A assholes.

  17. Another possibility you haven't thought of by tomhath · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Everyone agrees that there is something wrong with the child.

    The problem is that the parents are fixated on a specific disease which clinical tests do not support. So instead of trying to find out what's really wrong with her, the parents went looking for another doctor who would give them the diagnosis they want. Think about that.

  18. Re:Unbelievable and disgusting abuse of state powe by maccodemonkey · · Score: 3, Informative

    I heard about it on the radio a couple of weeks ago. This case is an absolutely appalling abuse of power.

    I did some Googling on this case in since I hadn't yet heard about it. Found this article:
    http://www.slate.com/articles/...

    If it's true that the parents shopped around for doctors to perform surgeries, and had extreme surgeries carried out around mitochondrial disease with no diagnostic based diagnosis that raises a ton of red flags.

    If you're going to make your kid get a stomach shunt, you'd at least want to run a few tests first, no? It seems reasonable that the doctors would want to separate the child from her parents if they thought they were unreasonably subjecting their daughter to medical procedures. Worst case: Childrens runs the diagnostics that should have been run in the first place, finds evidence of mitochondrial disease, gives the child back, and there is no harm done. If the doctors are right? Then a child's health may have been destroyed for no reason.

  19. Re:Of course he is by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    I hate "common sense." Detest the phrase, detest the use of it as a justification for anything, detest the people that embrace it. No, the people who are douchebags on slashdot are engaged in good old fashioned is/should fallacy, a world-wide human favorite.

  20. Re:Unbelievable and disgusting abuse of state powe by fermion · · Score: 2

    The law says that if a abuse is suspected, it must be reported and investigation must occur. There is no abuse of state power if a child is taken away because there is significant indication that abuse occurs. The problem here is the medical profession. They do not nearly spend enough time admitting they most administer palliatives and in many cases just choose the obvious diagnosis without really checking if it makes sense. Patients are also to blame as they believe the media, which has convinced most of us that a pill or topical solution is the answer to all our problems. So here is a child with a problem. Doctors have 10 minutes to make a diagnosis. Parents are desperate for a solution. Parents may have caused the problem,but if the did then doctors need to treat the parents, not the child. If doctors were trained to treat patients instead of individual problems maybe they could have treated the family. The Boston doctors appeared to be the first to look at the entire medical history, the family, and make a diagnosis. The NYT has monthly articles on patients that suffer because doctors are treating a symptom instead of the patients. I don't if this child has a illness that is treatable by drugs or a procedure, or if the illness requires the parents to change the behavior. What is suggested by the article is past doctors have not been helping her, so with the framework of trying something new, this seems a next reasonable step.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  21. Thoughtless how... by PortHaven · · Score: 2

    Pretty much all other means outside of the use of force have failed. What else do you want us to do to help these parants.

    Cause frankly, if this dad asked for help to rescue his daughter by force, I will tell you there are quite a few of us ready to come up to Mass and pledge our rifles if need be.

  22. And some possibilites you may not have thought of by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

    Its great you have a theory, but two sisters having the same genetic disease wouldn't be shocking. If you read the ABC news story above you'll see that there is meaningful medical history there that can't be faked. You're assuming that the chief of metabolism at Tufts medical center is wrong, and that Boston Children's diagnosis, for which there is no diagnostic test, is right. And then there is the fact that Boston Children's apparently has a history of these sort of "contentious" actions as noted in the story below.

    Frustration on all fronts in struggle over child’s future

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  23. Why girl was removed. by PortHaven · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Girl has a rare mitochondrial disease, her sibling has been diagnosed with it as well. She was receiving treatment at Tuft's. She was ill with a stomach bug, but has complications (ie: has a access point in her intestines for treatment access). When they contacted the primary physican they work with on their daughter's illness. He informed the family that the gastreoentologist they work with was now at BCH (not too far away). And that they might want to go there since he is already familiar with her and her case.

    PROBLEM:

    When they arrive, they don't get to see their regular specialist. Instead, a doctor with only a few years of experience decides that she doesn't have mitochondrial disease. Why? Because BCH doesn't really believe it exists (this has in fact led to the death of a 5 year old patient in BCH's care, when the sibling was later diagnosed with it as well and confirmed by three other tests. They released the child. The parents now receive care at Tufts. And their son has greatly improved under Tuft's care. Sadly, their daughter is dead because of BCH.)

    So BCH essentially says that ALL of these ailments are in fact in the daughter's head. They seize the daughter. File a claim against the parents for medical abuse. That's right, the abuse the parents are charged with is NOT refusing medical treatment for their daughter, but in seeking medical treatment for their daughter.

    Their daughter was locked away for 7 months in BCH's psych ward. Probably about the time the family's insurance quit paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for her to be there. Then she was released into Child Protective Services care. Since being in BCH/CPS' care, their daughter's health has deteriorated. And many are concerned the lack of treatment will eventually kill Justina.

    As for the case against the parents. BCH/CPS pretty much disallowed participation (even against the law) of doctors and personel who worked prior with Justina. In fact, they refuse to conduct tests that would prove them wrong. And here lies the crux of the problem.

    What BCH and CPS has done constitutes a several million dollar lawsuit. If they back down, they are sure to be sued and lose millions. So they've dug their heels in....

    It's pretty insane...but this is the same government that sends SWAT teams to arrest elderly handicapped folk who grow orchids and fail to file the proper paperwork.

  24. Re:What we would like to know by PortHaven · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The hospital pretty much does not believe in Mitochondrial disease. Just as many didn't believe in fibromylangia or Lyme disease.

    And instead claim "she is just crazy..."

    They might as well say the reason your daughter can't walk anymore is because she is a teenage girl and suffers from hysteria.

  25. Except that's not exactly true... by PortHaven · · Score: 4, Informative

    a) Mitochondrial disease is not well understood, and Justina in fact shows symptoms that point to such. As does her sibling.

    b) BCH had a similar case, they tried to seize a 5 year old girl. Only thing is when Child Protective Services (CPS) went to the home, they realized it was someone who used to work for them and that they knew were not a danger. So custody was restored.

    c) But at this point, their 5 year old daughter had gone without treatment for so long. She died.

    d) Their son began to show similar symptoms. This time BCH did do a test. The result showed positive. But they did not inform the parents for three months. And still did not act on it. A second test was done by an independent lab. Which also confirmed evidence of mitochondrial disease. Their son was released.

    e) Their son has since gotten treatment at Tufts under the same doctor treating Justina. Who is regarded as one of the premier experts in this field. Oh, guess what. After the restoration of treatment, their son's condition improved. Shame their daughter hadn't been treated by BCH, or she'd probably be alive.

    f) BCH killed one child and is now killing another.

  26. No... by PortHaven · · Score: 2

    Long Story Short.

    Parents have sick child with rare condition not very well understood.

    BCH doesn't believe condition exists. (BCH is already documented with killing one child with this condition.) So when parents arrive and reference diagnosis. BCH immediately assumes the parents are harming the kids.

    BCH and CPS kidnap and torture, and likely will kill the child. All while refusing medical care. Because they like "crazy parents" who believe their kid doesn't need medical care because it's all in their silly teenage daughter's head.

    BCH's diagnosis has proved wrong by the results. But now BCH and CPS are too invested. To capitulate, admits wrong doing, which will lead to a $10-$50 million lawsuit.

  27. Tests were done... by PortHaven · · Score: 2

    She was confirmed with GI issues. The shunt, isn't extreme. It was an alternative to the proposition of removing a large portion of her intestines. (The more common treatment which has far greater life long consequences.)

    BCH refused to run the tests. They killed a five year old girl because they refused to. When her brother came with similar symptoms. They wanted to charge the mother. But finally ran a test. It confirmed mitochondrial disease, but they didn't tell the parents. Then a second lab confirmed the test. And finally they conceded the possibility their son might have the disease. Family's son is now doing well (being treated at Tuft's by Justina's doctor)...sadly, his older sister is DEAD!!! DEAD!!! DEAD!!!

    You can thank the !@#$ at BCH

    1. Re:Tests were done... by maccodemonkey · · Score: 2

      She was confirmed with GI issues.

      Did she see a GI specialist? No.
      Were any actual diagnostic tests run? No.
      Was she verified to have mitochondrial disease as the source of these issues? Nope, even though such tests for it exists.
      Are there other medical issues that cause the same set of problems? Yep
      Do GI issues automatically imply she has mitochondrial disease? Hell to the no

      She could very well have mitochondrial disease. But at this point she basically has Schrodinger's Cat disease because her parents won't run any actual tests that exist for the thing they say she has. That her parents refuse to run any tests for the problem they are adamant she has isn't damning, but it would set off the same Münchausen's by proxy flags it set off for the doctors.

  28. Re:Of course he is by Kalriath · · Score: 2

    I'm pretty sure Occupy Wall Street managed to increase exposure of a problem without burning down some buildings too. Attacking infrastructure to draw attention to your cause does nothing but cement your status as a criminal and harm sympathy for your cause.

    --
    For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  29. Re:Unbelievable and disgusting abuse of state powe by pr0fessor · · Score: 3, Informative

    I found it interesting that she was taken off the medications used for stroke victims which they say was diagnosed via MRI as a large stroke. MRI is a standard diagnostic for stroke or also a CT scan and that it is related to the original diagnosis as it's a possible side effect of the mitochondrial disease. It's also a physical sign that would rule out somatoform disorder or somatic symptom disorders.

    Being that it was characterized as a large stoke tells me that the MRI should have shown it clearly making misdiagnoses unlikely.

  30. Re:No... by hey! · · Score: 2

    Tufts NEMC does have a long history with pediatrics, but Boston Children's is the go to hospital for advanced pediatric care in Boston -- possibly even the US. Tufts has 66 pediatric beds; Children's has 395.

    Children's is obligated by law to report suspected cases of Munchhausen by proxy; it was the courts that ordered this girl taken out of her parents' care. There's no upside to Children's for reporting a parent they don't actually suspect of medical abuse. For one thing, the parents and Internet "activists" can make any claim they want about Children's, but the hospital can't even defend itself. It's hands are tied by HIPAA.

    Nobody not directly involved with this case knows the truth. All anyone else knows is what the parents have told the media. It's entirely possible that the parents sincerely believe they're doing the best possible thing by their daughter. But stretches credulity that Children's reported the parents out of vindictiveness. Children's has a high degree of public regard and trust; it's been rated the top pediatric hospital in the country by US News an World Report for the last 23 consecutive years. It's hard to imagine any reason the hospital would jeopardize that degree of public regard by deliberately issuing a *spurious* report of suspected child abuse.

    So I think it's safe to say that Children's reported what its doctors suspected was a case of child abuse, as it is obligated to under the law. If anyone should be attacked by hactivists, it should be the Massachusetts legislature for passing child protection laws, and the courts that enforced the law.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  31. Re:WRONG by tomhath · · Score: 2

    Parents knew something was wrong with their child. They found a doctor who understood the disease.

    No one disputes that something is wrong. The parents were insisting that she had mitochondrial disease and when one doctor didn't agree they went to another, and another, until they found one who would treat mitrochondrial disease.

    Oh, and you know what...one of the things the parents were accused of? and was used to justify the custody claim?

    Her mother expressed that she needed a feeding tube.

    Her mother insisted on all kinds of treatments. She was caught at the hospital with a handful of hypodermic needles.

  32. Re:No... by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

    Why did her parents never confirm the diagnosis? There wasn't a medical test confirming her disgnosis ever done. Because this basic step was deliberately avoided by the parents, they got into trouble later. Some things seem fishy from both sides. It doesn't appear as clear-cut as you assert (multiple times in similar wording).

    Also, it appears the parents shopped doctors looking for one that was willing to diagnose her without doing any tests. She had been seen by others for the same mitochondrial disease, but wasn't diagnosed with it. So they kept looking. Why? Is it that they read about it on the Internet, and didn't care whether she had it, but diagnosed her with it, so she'd have it, even if she didn't?

    It may be as simple as someone seeing that most medical abuse is by parents who insisted the child had mitochondrial disease, so BCH made the assumption that anyone who insisted it was such, without a prior objective diagnosis, was considered abusive. Given the numbers involved, that's a logical conclusion, even if it results in too many false positives.

    I know that if I were still in the US, I'd likely have had CPS issues. I moved out of the US because it's unfixable. But I have a 7 year old who managed at age 4 to jump off a box 3 feet high and break an arm clean through (highly improbable), or fell getting out of a car at about the same age, landing on his face, and breaking a tooth, and recently fell in the shower, requiring 12 stitches across his eyebrow. At least all but one were when he was under supervised care (day care or after-school programs) with well established organizations with good reputations, so no suspicion was cast. He's just a klutz. He has constant bruises from where he runs into door knobs, walls, chairs, and such.

    In the US, there are protests if a child was reported but not immediately pulled in cases of "real abuse" and protests when "real abuse" is reported and the child is immediately pulled.

    My mother worked CPS her whole life. My sister worked CPS. Lasted a year before she had her breakdown and quit. Her example of why is:
    "You go to a house. The parents are loving and safe. But they won't say no to an uncle who comes in and rapes the children. So you know, for certain, that if you don't pull the children, the next time the uncle gets out of prison, he will be allowed to rape the children by the negligent parents. And you know that the parents love the children, and care for them well, aside from a blind spot for a particular relative. So, do you pull the children out of a loving household, subjecting them to foster care for as long as they are children (over 8 siblings have a near-zero chance of adoption), or leave them in a household with a 100% chance of being raped?"

    When you can answer that, you can comment on CPS.

    --
    Learn to love Alaska
  33. Re:What we would like to know by c6gunner · · Score: 2

    The hospital pretty much does not believe in Mitochondrial disease. Just as many didn't believe in fibromylangia or Lyme disease.

    I'm not aware of anyone who "didn't believe in Lyme disease". I AM aware that the vast majority of medical professionals still reject "chronic Lyme disease", because there's no evidence for it.

    Fibromylangia is just a label that's been stuck on a bunch of symptoms which may or may not be related, and may or may not have a common cause. Everyone agrees that the symptoms exist - nobody can show a mechanism which explains them all.

    And instead claim "she is just crazy..."

    In cases like the ones you mentioned, that diagnosis is accurate 9 times out of 10. Mitochondrial disease is different since we actually know more or less what causes it, and have pretty good tests for it which can rule out purely psychosomatic illnesses. However, given that her only real assessment was a diagnosis by her parents who then went doctor-shopping for a guy who agreed with them .... I'd say "you're all crazy" is a far more likely explanation than "she has a rare and trendy disease which you've successfully diagnosed via google and paranoia".