Medical Bill for Minor - who is guarantor?

What is the name of your state? California

My son was taken to the emergency room by his mother and she listed me as the guarantor. Now I am getting a ~$1000 bill for this service.

The court order states that I shall make all medical decisions for the minor child and have physical custody and that she can only make medical decisions given an emergency court order if the life of the child is threatened.

The mother was in violation of the court order when she brought him to the emergency room as she had no emergency order allowing her to make medical decisions.

I have written to the hospital indicating the above with a copy of the court order and telling them that she should be the guarantor of the bill.

Does this course of action seem like it will work?

Thanks.

Amazing.

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Originally posted by William_K_F
What is the name of your state? California

My son was taken to the emergency room by his mother and she listed me as the guarantor. Now I am getting a ~$1000 bill for this service.

The court order states that I shall make all medical decisions for the minor child and have physical custody and that she can only make medical decisions given an emergency court order if the life of the child is threatened.

The mother was in violation of the court order when she brought him to the emergency room as she had no emergency order allowing her to make medical decisions.

I have written to the hospital indicating the above with a copy of the court order and telling them that she should be the guarantor of the bill.

Does this course of action seem like it will work?

Thanks.

==================================

My response:

Please write back and quote the EXACT language of the court order concerning this matter.

IAAL

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

1. CUSTODY. Father shall continue to have physical custody of _______. Commencing forthwith, the parties shall share joint legal custody.

A. SCHOOL. [...]
B. MEDICAL DECISIONS. Father is a Christian Scientist. Father will make all medical decisions regarding ________. The parties are advised that if ________ is in a life-threatening situation, Mother has the right to request the court make orders for his medical treatment.

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Originally posted by William_K_F
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:


1. CUSTODY. Father shall continue to have physical custody of _______. Commencing forthwith, the parties shall share joint legal custody.

A. SCHOOL. [...]
B. MEDICAL DECISIONS: Father is a Christian Scientist. Father will make all medical decisions regarding ________. The parties are advised that if ________ is in a life-threatening situation, Mother has the right to request the court make orders for his medical treatment.

My response:

The key phrase is "a life-threatening situation". All because she took the child to the E.R. doesn't mean it was "a life-threatening situation". Your child needed immediate, but not life-threatening, medical assistance.

Also, the order DOES NOT say that in an "emergency" that she SHALL obtain a court order for medical treatment - - it only says that she "has the right." She doesn't have to exercise any "rights" she chooses not to exercise.

Can you imagine, your child is in an immediate "life-threatening situation", and you would expect the mother to first obtain a "court order"?

The child's jugular vein is punctured, and blood is spurting everywhere. Do you really expect mother to have time to obtain a court order?

The child's arm is fractured and is in excruciating pain. Do you really expect mother to have time to obtain a court order?

And, besides, that portion of the court order is if the child is in your custody at the time of an injury or other emergency and, due to your religious beliefs, you are failing to have a doctor attend to your child; e.g., you refuse to have your child infused with blood.

Then, if that should happen, and there's sufficient time, mother has "the right", and can go to court for an emergency order to get YOU to take action on behalf of the child, or to allow the doctors to make unilateral, life-saving decisions and measures, without your input.

You're on the hook for the medical bill. Remember, this is your child. I see your post as an effort to merely side-step a proper debt, and nothing more, and an attempt to use the court order as a bludgeon against the mother by tying her hands when it comes to emergencies.

IAAL

[nailtech]

The mother actually signed this decree? I take it she’s not a Christian Scientist??

How old is this child? Does this child have any say so in his/her religion preferences??

Imagine a mothers intuition/common sense, over religion... what a concept...

I wonder what the Non emergency was, a mere broken arm...

If I may summarize: The prior post says that I should be the guarantor and not the mother who brought the child to the hospital.

This doesn't seem fair but oh well. Especially since the situation was not an emergency nor do I believe it required immediate attention. Furthermore, the visit served to create a medical problem way above and beyond the condition before he went. For that matter, I feel the mother probably shouldn't have to pay either, as the only service was to make the patient worse off, while that wasn't the intention, it was the outcome.

Let me try and clear up a common misconception since the prior post seemed to me to imply that my action might be to refuse treatment and do nothing. As a Christian Scientist, and a parent, I wish for my child to have the best care possible (I'm sure I'm not alone in this). If the child were in a life threatening situation, I would take immediate action to resolve the situation. While I do not know how I might handle any theoretical situation, I do know that in my experience I have found prayer to be an effective and practical step to take to resolve medical issues. To say that by not resolving a medical situation by following a proceedure accepted by the majority of society is subjective. I understand the issue becomes much more thorny when a minor is involved as society feels the need to act in the best interests of a child and if prayer is seen as being ineffective it is logical for society to feel that nothing is being done and feel outraged.

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

While I don't agree with your religious tenets, especially when it comes to children, I do respect your rights to "believe" as you choose and would fight to protect your rights - insofar as adults are concerned.

That being said, please explain how prayer is going to help your child who has a slit throat due to a fall off his bicycle?

And, tell me, how does prayer help a child's broken arm?

Will you take precious time to pray first before you finally decide to seek the emergency medical assistance your child requires?

Will you actually force the mother to seek a court order BEFORE you act in the best, LIFE, interests of your child?

Here is my "belief" - - children cannot decide for themselves what is in their best interests. Adults have that capability and, if YOU choose not to accept a certain medical procedure, or wait too long to accept that medical procedure due to lengthy praying, then I respect that, and you should decide FOR YOURSELF how your life should, or should not, proceed. But, a child cannot make that choice, and I don't believe, IN A MEDICAL EMERGENCY, that you have that right to decide.

I guess, my question is, are you going to call an ambulance first, or are you going to pray first?

Juries have locked up parents like you for "child neglect". Don't push the "envelope" or you might be hearing metal doors "clinking" in your future.

So please, don't make your child an "experiment" for the sake of religion. Do it to yourself, but not to an innocent.

IAAL

[nailtech]

that was also my issue IAAL, (about prayer helping) he "might" be protected by religion, but the mother will not be if she is not C.S.... people in Texas get locked up all the time for not seeking medical attention when a child is hurt or sick especially if they don’t have a religion to "hide behind".... and I also am one for "to each is own",... but the child should come first no matter what...

Given any hypothetical situation, I can not tell you how I will act ahead of time. I will tell you that I will do what I feel is in the best interests of the child, that is, I will take the course of action which I think has the greatest chance of resolving the situation. This is what any parent will do that loves their child. Whether that means I will make a choice that others in that situation might make I won't know until the situation arises.

I do know that neither going to a doctor nor relying on prayer for healing offers a guaranteed resolution. There are documented cases of all of the following:

1) Person dies relying on prayer.
2) Person dies relying on medical treatment.
3) Person gives up an prayer and switches to successful medical treatment.
4) Person is medically diagnoised and the physisian gives up on the case and the person is subsequently healed through prayer and re-evaluated by the physisian who can not explain the result.

That being the case, unless one wishes to do statistical analysis to determine which one is statistically better, it does not make sense to uniltaterally say that one or the other is in the best interest of a person. Furthermore, to take the idea of statistical analysis to its extreme, one could compare different techniques used by different physisians to determine which one has a better track record while there may not yet be concensus in the medical profession as to which is better. Given the proceedure with a better track record, should society specify that only that proceedure may be performed and hold a parent liable for chosing the alternative if it doesn't pan out?

For what it is worth, medical research at Harvard Medical School has demonstrated that prayer has a statistically positive influence on patient's medical conditions. As to what that implies is up to debate and is subjective.

I feel the bottom line is, does the proceedure, Medical or Prayer have a proven track record of success. Christian Science treatment has over a hundred years of successful treatment. It is on this basis that legislatures around the country have recognized Christian Science treatment as a legitamite alternative to traditional medical care, even for minors. Robert Peel wrote researched a book "Spiritual Healing in a Scientific Age". The core of the work consists of affidavits by Christian Scientists attesting to the healing of such disorders as spinal meningitis, compound pelvic fracture, broken vertebra, breast cancer, cancer of the uterus, double club feet, third-degree burns, acute rheumatic fever, polio, eczema, epilepsy, appendicitis, rheumatoid arthritis, tuberculosis, blood poisoning, diptheria and glaucoma. Each of the healings Peel cites, over half of which involve children, were medically corroborated either by diagnoses or follow-up medical examination or both.

For a more thorough and thoughtful analysis of these issues please see:

http://home.earthlink.net/~williamfoster/SpiritualHealingTrial.html.txt

[nailtech]

As a mother, and not of Christian Science religion; but Baptist by faith**************(but this is not a faith issue) but of common sense...

In a medical emergency I would first call 911 then pray.....
While in surgery (if needed), I would pray then....

*************************************************
quote:
Should society specify that only that procedure may be performed and hold a parent liable for choosing the alternative if it doesn't pan out?
*************************************************
Try saving your child before trying to save your own ass... or a bill..... (my opinion)

Seek medical treatment then seek God to get them through it.....
A wing and a prayer is not all you have out there.... God gave you brains, use them...he gave Dr's some too, let them use them as they were taught to...

[racer72]

My state passed a law a few years ago that allow doctors to treat minors under 18 for life threatening injuries or illness against the wishes of the parent(s). The law has been challenged a couple of times and a case is currently in the state court of appeals challenging the legality of the law. The law was in response to a case where the parents of a 7 year old girl allowed her to die a slow and painful death from a simple bacterial infection because they felt their religeous principles took priority over the girls life. A $5 antibiotic prescription would have saved her life. I personally think it is insane for someone's religous beliefs should prevent anyone from obtaining basic health care.

[nailtech]

I dont know why when I read your post the word "Insane" came up "Asinine" in my head, I had to reread it to get it right....

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

[quote]Originally posted by William_K_F
[b]


"Given any hypothetical situation, I can not tell you how I will act ahead of time."

===================================

My response:

Well, if that's the case, then I think the court made a BIG mistake to give you residential custody of your child.

As any good parent will tell you, they have already thought about this possibility and have ALREADY decided what to do in the even of a medical EMERGENCY. They have a plan of action - - save the child's life.

In other words, and part of being a good parent, this should not even be a question. You put your personal life and your religious life on the "back burner" and you rush your child to a hospital.

Was Mary Baker Eddy - -

1. A morphine addict?

2. Subject to frequent hysterical rages?

3. A plagiarist?

4. A litigious and malicious person who used litigation against her critics and persecuted those she regarded as disloyal?

I don't buy, for one minute, that prayer can cure "spinal meningitis, compound pelvic fracture, broken vertebra, breast cancer, cancer of the uterus, double club feet, third-degree burns, acute rheumatic fever, polio, eczema, epilepsy, appendicitis, rheumatoid arthritis, tuberculosis, blood poisoning, diptheria and glaucoma."

John Peel was a whacko crackpot. Prayer doesn't cure anything, and you can't prove that it does. Only your "faith" says it's so. Medicine and medical procedures, on the other hand, cure - - and it's proven.

And, guess what?

When it comes to your own child, I do not believe that you buy it either.

IAAL

[nailtech]

as always,**************. WELL SAID IAAL**************

I sure wished I had the ex's number I would love to tell her the courts screwed up... big time...