Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Hi all,
With his permission, I am forwording Stephen Drake's message (below) regarding the case of Ruben Navarro. The Cilla Sluga blog Steve recommends reading sheds a very different light on this story as compared to mainstream media reports and Steve does a nice job of summarizing the issues below.

In order to think about ways that FRIDA might respond to this case I’d like to know what others see as the feminist aspects involved. For example, and just to get started, is the effective breaking up of Rosa’s small family (just her and Ruben) after Rosa became disabled a feminist issue? Is the hospital’s treatment of Rosa Navarro (ignoring her) a feminist issue? Are there more feminist points in the case?

Nothing formal here, stream-of-consciousness thinking is fine. I’m just trying to flesh out what the uniquely feminist issues to this tragedy could be and I could use all of your thoughts on this.
Thanks in advance. Sharon

**********

Ruben Navarro, whose death was allegedly "hastened" by a
transplant physician in full view of other medical professionals,
is a disability story.

But you wouldn't know it from the press coverage.

That needs to change. Right now, the news is dominated by ethicists,
lawyers and medical advocates of all stripes, all of them coming to the front to talk about the concerns they have about how this incident will affect their respective interests.

For the fullest account of Navarro's life and death, I urge advocates and
activists to read the following blog entry by Cilla Sluga, an Illinois
disability advocate who is the mother of an adult with disabiblities and who has acquired disabilities herself as an adult:

http://mybignoise.blogspot.com/2007/08/diagnosis-murder.html

According to Cilla, whose research on the coverage and documentation
is comprehensive:

Ruben Navarro was placed in a nursing home due to his mother's
disabilities and lack of ability to find in-home support.

At the nursing home, Ruben Navarro developed bedsores due to neglect. He
also experienced harmful seizures due to staff neglect in giving him
appropriate anti-seizure medication.

The seizures are what landed him in the hospital where his health
declined. On life support, his mother was told there was a five-day limit for giving life-support.

As most reading this are aware, Ruben Navarro was given massive doses
of morphine and ativan by a transplant surgeon who wasn't supposed to
touch Navarro until he'd been declared dead. This occurred in full view of
numerous other medical professionals, none of whom have suffered legal or
professional penalties or sanctions.

In a state where assisted suicide is still a hot and popular topic, the
disability community cannot afford to be silent. This is about the lack of proper community support, abuse and neglect in institutions, the devaluing of our lives in medical settings, and the lack of accountability that exists for members of the medical profession.

As this case progresses, there will be numerous opportunities to speak out
about issues important to ADAPT, Not Dead Yet and others in the disability
community. Our voices are the best chance to affect the dialog about this
issue in a way that will prevent repeats.

Right now, the big concern in the public dialog appears to be that the
publicity surrounding this will negatively impact the rate of organ donation.

That's important, but so was the life of Ruben Navarro - and the lives of
others left similarly vulnerable.

Stephen Drake
Research Analyst
Not Dead Yet
7521 Madison St.
Forest Park, IL 60130
708-209-1500
http://www.notdeadyet.org

2 comments:

Kay Olson said...

For example, and just to get started, is the effective breaking up of Rosa’s small family (just her and Ruben) after Rosa became disabled a feminist issue? Is the hospital’s treatment of Rosa Navarro (ignoring her) a feminist issue?

Yes to both questions, I think. I'd also like to know what role racism or language barriers might have played in Rosa's ability to advocate for her son.

Also, several nurses present during this nightmare have gone on record as being very disturbed by the events as they were going on: What effect would a nurse's refusal to comply with an order have on her employment? Or on the present situation? How did the structure of power in that hospital contribute to everyone standing by as this occurred?

Sharon Lamp said...

Hi Kay,
Because hospitals are gendered and patriarchal environments I tend to see cries of abuse, mistreatment, uninformed consent, 'hastened-death' etc. from patients (and family/allies) in hospital settings as likely to involve feminist issues.

Feminist thinking includes the notion of being in solidarity with those who are poor and vulnerable. Looking at the characteristics of the victims (Ruben and Rosa): in this case, the victims are Hispanic, indigent and disabled. Rosa is a single mother. Ruben was developmentally disabled, unable to communicate with his doctors, and described as having “low brain activity.” These descriptions of Rosa and Ruben Navarro match those of people who are generally devalued in our society and have very little if any power in today’s medical settings - and they match those that both feminists and disability rights activists should be in solidarity with.

Feminist thinking also includes a commitment to giving voice to those who have none. Ruben Navarro could not communicate with his doctors. It’s likely the transplant surgeon at least did not view Ruben as having personhood. Linda Edwards has considered this aspect of the case - and I’m hoping Linda will jump in and share her thoughts on this aspect.  Were there language barriers between Rosa Navarro and the doctors? In relation to whether English is Rosa Navarro’s first language I don't know. However by not advising Rosa of their plans for Ruben for 4 days, and then forcing Rosa Navarro to process the series of traumatic info. Dumped on her shortly before Ruben's planned demise, the medical experts constructed an extremely effective communication barrier between the hospital and the patient/family.

There are other ways of identifying this as a feminist issue and I’m looking forward to hearing more in this respect. From my perspective Rosa Navarro is challenging the dominant power structure. She is insisting that her son’s life had value and that it be valued. She is demanding a voice and protesting the lack of real choice that was given to her and Ruben. By doing so she is influencing the written records of this case and reclaiming Ruben’s history and his life story. Rosa Navarro is giving the medical system a feminist response we should all be proud of and support.

Your second point re the silent but disturbed by-standers is very interesting to me and I want to come back to it but for now, I’ll close. Thanks for your thoughts on this Kay. Sharon Lamp