A Virginia judge has ruled that the Fauquier Hospital was in contempt of the court for refusing to administer Ivermectin to the patient. The hospital would also be liable to pay $10,000 for each day it fails to administer Ivermectin, retroactive to the date of the court’s injunction.
The hospital announced Tuesday that it had intent of following the court order after a judge found Fauquier Hospital in Virginia in contempt of a lawsuit filed by a patient with Covid-19 who had been denied from being prescribed Ivermectin.
Christopher Davis, the son of the patient in question Kathleen Davis, told the Fauquier Times that at 8:45 p.m., the woman was given two doses of Ivermectin.
This happened after Judge James. P. Fisher of Virginia’s 20th Judicial Court signed a ruling Monday that portrayed Fauquier Hospital in contempt of court for “needlessly interposing requirements that stand in the way of the patient’s desired physician administering investigational drugs as part of the Health Care Decisions Act and the federal and state Right to Try Acts.”
Additionally, “given the gravity at hand,” the hospital has to pay “$10,000 per day retroactive to the date of the court’s injunction order filing,” the judge ruled, implying that every day the hospital fails to prescribe Ivermectin to Davies, they will be held accountable and be liable to pay the fine “until the ordered relief has been accomplished.”
Her family put in a request that the hospital provides Davies, who has been supported by a ventilator ever since the 3rd of November, with Ivermectin so as to treat her COVID-19 as a final resort to save her life. The Fauquier Times reported that Davies’ family doctor had prescribed Ivermectin for the woman, but Fauquier Hospital declined the use of the drug, citing medical, legal, and other concerns.
According to the Fauquier Times, the woman’s family took legal action and filed a lawsuit on December 6th to compel the hospital to treat her with the drug.
“It’s a matter of life and death,” Christopher Davies told the paper. “She’s on her death bed. Any kind of negative repercussions [from Ivermectin] are null and void.” Since all treatment options failed to work, Davies argued that the family should be allowed to try the drug.
“I get it. The doctors at the hospital are afraid. This has become politically charged. I’m not trying to go after the hospital. I just want them to use it in hopes that it will help,” he further added, addressing the controversy on using Ivermectin as a treatment to counter COVID-19. “They believe it’s a fight between the rights of the hospital and the rights of citizens. They feel their rights trump her rights,” Davies continued.
Fauquier Hospital spokeswoman Sarah Cubbage told the Fauquier Times in a lengthy statement that the center was now following the judge’s order and trying to put an end to the court’s contempt.
“Like all other hospitals, we are bound by rules and regulations that govern how we operate to ensure that we administer care safely to our patients,” Cubbage said in the statement. “From a legal and regulatory standpoint, we must always follow the appropriate steps to credential and privilege physicians to practice medicine at our facilities … this is to protect patients and ensure the consistent delivery of quality care.”
Furthermore, she argued that the hospital “cannot compel physicians to administer treatment that is against their clinical judgment and is not within the accepted medical standards of care.”
“We believe that we have navigated these complexities as swiftly as possible and have remained in compliance with standard hospital practice, including federal and state regulations, throughout this matter,” she added.
Commenting on their compliance with Fisher’s order, Cubbage said the court gave the hospital “additional guidance and clarification,” which it would then be able to meet.
“We have reported this to the court and requested that the contempt order be purged,” she added in the statement.
However, on Wednesday, a spokesperson for Virginia’s Fauquier Hospital told the media that it “would like to correct the misinformation regarding the family who disagreed with the clinical course of treatment recommended by our physicians for their family member.”
“As outlined in the court documents, a patient’s family filed a petition seeking to compel our hospital to administer medication prescribed by an outside physician. This physician had no privileges to practice medicine at our hospital,” according to the spokesperson.
They went on to state that it “is unable to administer medications to our patients without a valid order from a physician on our medical staff” and that “doing so would violate standard hospital practice and Virginia law.”
“That said, our team has worked around the clock to cooperate with the patient’s family and the Court to identify potentially viable solutions, including to make a reasonable attempt to transfer the patient’s care to their preferred physician, which has since happened,” stated the spokesperson, later adding that “despite what has been shared online, we believe that we have navigated these complexities as swiftly as possible and have remained in compliance with standard hospital practice, including federal and state regulations, throughout this matter.”
Earlier, in a similar incident, an elderly patient was given Remedesivir to treat Covid-19 in an Illinois hospital, but it could not treat the patient. This hospital was insisting on administering this drug. But, the patient was recovered with Ivermectin when the court allowed him to use it despite the hospital’s objections.
According to a study, a Brazilian city cut hospitalizations and mortality in half by offering Ivermectin to everyone pre-vaccine.
Meanwhile, the Indian Bar Association has taken legal action against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan for her role in spreading disinformation and suppressing data on the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID-19.
Original article –