₦airaland Forum

Jaqenhghar:
The only thing I got here is the same ol vivtim blaming and not taking reposnibility for anything. You speak as of you know me or you have some other knowledge of the matter. You clearly didnt read what I wrote let me spell it to you again. we visited like 3 teaching hospitals and 2 private hospitals. Money was NEVER the issue. There is no test we did not do. No money we did not spare so dont tell me that bullshit about we dont want to pay we were willing to fly her abroad but for one my cousin ( a doctor like you) who kept reassuring us that it wasnt necessary.
Maybe in your wisdom we should have treated her ourselves too. Mtcheew

when you were quoting me, I knew you were harbouring some bitterness against the wrong set of people. Sorry for your mum. You said SIMPLE DIAGNOSIS THEY COULDNT MAKE. You know it us simple but you yourself can't make it. For you to know it is simple you should have made it now. Now let's be more professional...you took her to 3 teaching hospitals and 2 private hospitals ...does that not tell you it must be a very serious case. Doctors don't claim to be God, they are only humans. So all the doctors in five hospitals and all the people doing the test couldn't make A SIMPLE DIAGNOSIS WHICH YOU AS A GENIUS ALREADY KNEW IT IS SIMPLE. You are the one with ego here not the doctors. Come down from your high horse and be humble, they will school you. Depending on the stage at presentation, a definite diagnosis is not ALWAYS POSSIBLE OR A MUST. WORLDWIDE!!!! You may know the kidney is damaged beyond repair, you may not know the exact singular thing that caused it. You may only know the risk factors like hypertension, diabetes etc if they are present. You may have ORGANIC DIAGNOSIS like knowing the liver is damaged, you may not be able to pinpoint the exact cause. And in late stage, there may be myriad of problems without a single DIAGNOSIS again...the liver, the kidney, the heart even the brain may all be damaged and you may not know the exact thing that started the cascade. So diagnosis is not about telling you one singular thing that is causing the problem.... And that doesn't always affect management. If a kidney is damaged already, we know what to do even though we may not know the exact cause. So leave diagnosis for the professional and make a name for yourself in your own profession. By the way, worldwide, the best set of people study medicine. So the doctors are a reflection of the society. We didn't come from Egypt. We are Nigerians.. So tell me, which profession is so good in Nigeria so that we know doctors are deliberately wicked. Is it not engineers that build roads that get spoilt in one month? Is it not bankers that run banks down? So saying all Nigerian doctors are bad is like saying you are so so bad cos while not looking down on other profession, the best studied medicine so you couldn't have been better in your profession. So the rot is in the country...not in individual profession

[quote author=blackgold2018 post=71421656][/quote]when you are ready for sound discussion devoid of insult, quote me again.

Jaqenhghar:
Just read what you first wtote and tell me if it makes sense. Doctors get away with malpractice because people's mind is biased against them. SMH If you are a doctor I pity your patients

swerve and allow intelligent people to contribute. Your bias will make you find fault in everything they do leading to frivolous cases that will make doctors keep winning malpractice cases. Court is based on facts...not emotions. Medicine is now evidence based...not emotion or social media based

collabo4me:
The lady maybe right because last year when my wife was pregnant. We wen to Gbagaga gen hosp. We are told to do lab test, after d test they did mistake by detecting wrong blood group which we already knew d right one. Now had it been we did nt check d result d doctors will makes a lot of mistakes. Tnx

That is the fault of the lab not the doctor. More so, it may be from REAGENT too. If the reagent is flat, it won't be the fault of the lab scientists too. But missing your blood group is not enough to make a big mistake in transfusion.... When they want to transfuse, they will still crossmatch it. So even if the lab got the wrong blood group, it will keep showing during cross matching. More so, even if we know your blood group, we still cross match the donor with your blood. After all this, even if you still reacts to the transfusion, there are steps to be taken immediately. Blood transfusion reaction doesn't mean instant death so the lady is not likely correct. If she had solid evidence she would have revealed it here

chronique:
Chai!!! I almost lost my baby sister to this but God stepped in. I went to see her at the hospital and she was given blood transfusion. They went to buy another pint of blood that they would give after the first one... I took out time to quickly go see a friend but as I was getting close to his house, a voice was telling me to go back to the hospital. I still kept going to my friend's house and the voice kept asking me to go back. I had gotten to his gate and was about stepping into his compound but that voice came again inside of me and was so sharp and clear. I turned around and went back to the hospital and as I got there, they were about inserting the needle into the new pint of blood. I checked and saw it was a different one from what was just removed and I called the attention of the nurse who was about fixing it. She then looked at it and saw they were different and took it to the doctor. The doctor was mad at them and asked why they didn't check that before attempting to fix it. That's how I would have lost my sister due to carelessness of the hospital, if I didn't obey that subconscious voice that kept asking me to go back to the hospital. It's obvious a lot of deaths in hospitals in Nigeria, occurs due to carelessness from the medical/health workers.

thanks @madridguy for calling my attention to this. Since she claimed it was attested to by the doctor, I won't say a mistake wasn't made here. Though appearance has nothing to do with blood. It is the blood group that matters. For example, I can give O negative blood to anybody. So if your blood group is btve, I can give you Btve now and the second pint may be o positive so it may not exactly be the same. But it must be compatible. But there are several blood types not commonly tested that can still cause reaction so even if it is compatible, it can still cause reaction. But blood reaction doesn't mean INSTANT DEATH. In a normal hospital, it rarely cause death because we will know there is reaction. Once there is reaction, we will just stop it, give a certain drip, certain injections to limit the spread. Even without a doctor...a nurse can start the treatment because normally you would have given down instruction in the casenote that IN CASE OF BLOOD TRANSFUSION REACTION...DO THIS AND THAT. So, this may be a genuine case of carelessness which is rare. You know why? You will need to send sample to the lab, the lab will crossmatch the blood with what they have, they will release it with a note stating the blood group of the patient and the blood group of the donor. The doctor or nurse putting it up too would have checked. So it must have passed through at least two officials. Don't forget the blood would have been taking to central bank if it is Lagos where they too would have confirmed the blood type and out logo. We will now remove the logo and put it on the patient card. So while I am not saying mistake is not possible since we are all humans, it is rare and there will be facts backing it up

BeingFrank:
The bolded summarizes my point empty inflated ego.

There were so many facts I pointed to my lawyer about a tenancy case and he told me they were not tenable in court. To me they were facts, to him they were junks. When we got to court, he was right. I told my structural engineer so many things about my house but he said if they were included they won't approve it. To me it was facts, to him they are junks. Nigerians display a lot of ignorance in other peoples field and come back to say they are proud. As a matter of fact, if you any small thing about medicine, you will immediately know the lady here is just ranting based on emotions not facts. We understand because he lost somebody. It doesn't mean the doctors didn't know what they are doing

BeingFrank:
And the annoying part of it, is if you try to point out some facts to them during the process, their empty inflated ego will make them do the contrary even the more. If people start following them up due to their negligence, i believe some will leave or sit up. So many medical practitioners in this country are so careless and irresponsible, because they believe they can always kill and get away with it. Its really sad.

Doctors will keep getting away with malpractice because of people like you with a biased mind against them . You didn't find out whether what the lady is saying is true, you just conclude they are careless. So once a patient on transfusion dies, it means they gave him wrong blood. For your information in Lagos, we give blood from Lagos central bank. All blood must pass through the central bank where they put Lagos logo before we can transfuse. So assuming what she is saying is even true that they gave wrong blood then it is the fault of Lagos state not the doctor. Moreso, transfusion reaction csn occur even after crossmatching so it doesnt always count as malpractice once you react to blood. The lady didnt tell you her brothers sickness, at presentation. Just talked about overdose and tranafusion and you are here abusing the doctors already.Secondly, how did she know overdose? So she knows the right dose and now knows it is overdose. You think once you accuse a doctor without proof, the doctor is automatically guilty? Gather your proofs. Do autopsy. Not ranting on social media without proofs. By the way, you said you point facts to them....what is fact to you, a layman may be spoken out of ignorance. You are not a doctor. Your facts may be junks

thesicilian:
There's only one Ronaldo and his name is Cristiano. One day he's going to buy up Barcelona and sell off Messi to China.

kid. The highest goal scorer in any single world cup in the last 60yrs. Korea/Japan 2002.

PHILipu1:
.
Is like your brain is dead.
You state the reason why Oni is court which is Fayemi didn't resign and he should be declare the authentic candidate,what if Oni had gone to court and say that the APC primary was bad and the court should declare it null and void,is it handing over the election victory to the PDP candidate?

You get brain so?

Go back and read the man statement again and you will understand what he meant,Ortom came from PDP to use APC platform to win the Benue governorship election for PDP.

let me quote the man verbatim.......
His words: “Now that he (Ortom) has left I want you to know PDP won the elections in 2015 and not the APC.
........that is the exact statement credited to the man. Can you give me any other reason why I should believe otherwise that your brain is made of cow's urine? Zombie!!!!

PHILipu1:
.
Lol.
Your brain will not tell you that a party man can not challenge the main election that his party won in court and the man was referring to APC primary that Ortom won.

What if the court disqualify all the candidate on APC platform during the primary for faulty primary?

In Ameachi case,he was lucky that the court didn't disqualify the primary that brought Ameachi opponent,so it is a different scenario ok.

APC didn't have any candidate in the just concluded Anambra senatorial election that APGA won because APC candidates were barred from contesting because of faulty primary

oga go and sit down. Segun oni is presently in court challenging the eligibility of fayemi to become APC flagbearer since he didn't resign before being declared. So should court decide in his favour, he automatically becomes the governor elect even though he didn't participate in the general election since he scored the highest votes after fayemi in APC primary. So don't misquote the man. He is saying PDP won in 2015 and nothing more. Don't twist fact

PHILipu1:
.
You get brain so?
He was talking about the APC primary that Ortom won that if they have gone to court to get Ortom disqualify for the primary election that it would have benefited the PDP candidate who the court may declare the winner if Ortom who carried APC flag was disqualify for wrong APC primary.

Use your head before you post.

Can the man be in APC and still challenge the main governorship election that his own Ortom that was in APC won?

lies again. Your brain was in recession when same scenario was decided in favour of amaechi. The court in Nigeria has established that parties...not individuals contest. So if Orton was disqualified based on primaries and the APC had won, the seat is still for the APC. They will only declare the rightful winner of the primaries as the winner of the election. So tell us another lie

PHILipu1:
Can't you guys just read and understand simple statement?

Ortom came from PDP to win and he has return to PDP with the APC mandate.

What he is saying is simple,he mean that Ortom deceive APC by claiming he is APC and won the governorship for PDP.

stop telling lies. He said if he had pursued the case in court, it would favour PDP since they won. See this quote here........

The APC aspirant, who went to court alongside others to challenge the victory of Ortom in court, noted that they had no option than to withdraw from the case because it dawned on them that the PDP candidate, Terhemen Tarzoor, might carry the day.

He said it would have benefitted the PDP more had Ortom lost the case; hence they took the decision to let go of the case at the last minute.

Corrinthians:
What he was even saying is that Ortom has always been a pdp member even though he won under the banner of APC.

Our journalists are sure not the smartest in the world.

lies. What he is saying is that if he had pursued the case against Orton in court , the court would have realised that PDP won so he had to let it go. Go and read it again

[quote author= post=70677673]Lie kill u dia! [/quote]check the presidency of Mohammed buhari not the rubbish you posted here. I am neutral here. It was trump that said he is lifeless as confirmed by Wikipedia. Not my fault that your idol is lifeless

Somebody quickly edited the profile of Mohammed buhari to accommodate his new title on Wikipedia.... Lifeless President!!!

okusebi:
Hello everyone, today is a happy day and i feel like sharing the good news with you guys, some time ago i created a topic https://www.nairaland.com/2247427/advice.....found-out-cgpa-miscalculated-after#up about an issue where i needed advise about discovering that my CGPA was wrongly calculated after collection of transcript.

Well i took your advise and i decided to get a lawyer, first i tried doing it my self but the school was unresponsive. My lawyer wrote several letters to them including action to go to court if the CGPA is not recalculated.

Well, finally it has been recalculated after 4 years of graduation, formally it was 3.4, now it is 3.51 which second class upper division, i am so happy, although i have lost several opportunities because of this great error from Delta State university. i look into the positive light that everything happens for a reason.

Congrats. You have gotten the first evidence of a potential long battle to claim at least 50million naira in damages for lost opportunity. So the school made a mistake. You must now prove that mistake made you lose a lot of opportunities. That is the difficult part. Even if you get chevron advertisement insisting that you need 2.1 for interview you can't prove you would have passed the interview. If you can get a letter from a potential employer dated like 3yrs back claiming you were qualified but the 2.2 would not allow them to employ you. Homeboy....you don't hammer. Make the potential salary be like 5million per annum. That is 15million in lost revenue. Add damages of 20million for the psychological torture of losing such a potential opportunity. Your lawyer will add more. I no be lawyer but I no e go work.

eyinjuege:
You are not the child's father. Your wife is the mother. Will your wife reject her own child? What kind of a mother is that? You either support your wife or not. But that child is your wife's joint responsibility with the father. Not her grandmother's responsibility.
Her father has been taking care of that since she was a baby. I'm even disappointed in the OPs wife that she abandoned her flesh and blood since childhood. More now than ever, the child needs her mother as she will soon start reaching puberty.
I expect the wife to contribute to the upkeep of her child, including feeding. The father can pay the school fees of that child, while the mother will be responsible for other things. I wouldn't call the father irresponsible, and I believe he will be more than happy to split the bills regarding that child has he has singlehandedly done it for years.
The only thing I believe worrying the OP is what people will say, forgetting that everybody has their own family dynamics and problems.

You are very correct. The wife is a co-owner of the child. Neither the grandma nor the new husband are under any strict obligation to take care of the child. For the sake of love for the wife, the husband can agree if he is so willing. Likewise, for the sake of love for the daughter, the grandma can accept and intact, she is the best person to help this family. So, if the grandma is not feeling guilty not helping her own biological daughter then the husband shouldn't feel compelled too unless he is so willing. That has always been my stand

Lomprico2:
The poster even called him a 'useless father'. Sending d girl back to him simply means destroying her. His wife will make life hell for her! Is that what u are suggesting?

if the wife of the father will make life hell for the child, who told you the husband of the mother will be any better? So if the OP starts sleeping with the girl nko? It is not possible abi?

Uguruzik:
If you can take care of her feeding, I don't see any hard deal there, she's your wife's daughter and can be of help to you and her siblings one day. And mind you that your wife will be depressed if you too rejects the girl and this will change a lot of things in your home negatively [So be kind enough to accept her ]

Don't you think the wife will be more depressed by the time the guy starts shouting on the girl. The mother will eventually think the husband don't like the child and become depressed. More so, does it mean the happiness of this man does not count? He should just make the wife and the little girl happy and make himself unhappy cos it is obvious he is not happy having an extra responsibility added to his already heavy responsibility of taking care of 3kids. You people should fear GOD.

LaudableXX:
You are saying something similar to what I have been saying. My remarks were a response to another poster who claimed that, the person paying the school fees is showing how capable he is. He kept arguing in previous posts, that custody of a 7 year old child, would be given to the father, and I disagreed with that. This is what he said :

He is telling you you are wrong. You are saying the man is trying to prove the woman is not capable that was why custody was awarded. I was saying no and that is what the guy is trying to tell you.

LaudableXX:
Once a man goes to court, to prove he is paying school fees including other bills for taking care of the daughter, when he is fighting for custody, he is trying to show the court, that the woman lacks the means or ability to take care of the child.

If custody is granted to the wife, nobody says the man will stop paying school fees. In fact the court will compel him to pay alimony, which includes school fees and cost of upkeep, for the child. You know absolutely zero about child custody, yet you keep arguing.

What is the one saying ?/Hope I am arguing with somebody I think because the moment I suspect otherwise I will run. So once somebody is paying school fees, the other person must not be capable. Are you for real? Showing you pay school fees only proves you are capable it doesn't mean the other person is not capable. So if the husband pays school fees it means the wife must tell the school that they should reject the school fees to prove she is capable or what. In Africa, who pays school fees even if the wife is okay. Please don't let me assume I am arguing with somebody that I am now assuming

[quote author=LaudableXX post=70021801][/quote]you like stories. Who told you that once the husband claims he is paying school fees it means the wife cant take care of the child? Even if custody is granted to the wife, who told you the husband will stop paying school fees? Read about child custody first then you can make a more informed discussion

InvertedHammer:
/
Nobody wins custody battle. The court goes for equal parenting and will allocate support based on time spent with the kid(s), income and other factors. I mentioned ground for loss of custody by either parent.
Keep deluding yourself.
/

my lawyer sir!!!! Yes you can win full custody. Court can grant full custody to one parent, shared custody to both, 3rd party custody, temporary custody. Etc. So you see, you don't have to be so old to research

InvertedHammer:
/
A mother should raise her young child which is why the court usually grants custody to women unless the biological mother is incapacitated, which is not an issue in this case.

Simple. Keep writing epistle.
/

since it is that simple, you will do better as a divorce lawyer rather than claiming to be methuselah on nairaland. Women get custody in most cases not because of your simple analogy but because most men don't contest it anyway. They feel na wahala self to take care of the child so they automatically don't contest it. Most men with means and especially wives at home almost always win custody fights unless the child is under 3. Methuselah

InvertedHammer:
/
So someone here thinks that a 7-yrs old girl will be better taken care of by his dad instead of the mother?

OP: You cannot wriggle out of this one.

Too many kids here on NL.
/

I am not supposed to respond to insecure people like you. It irritates me when I see people talking about age where wisdom is being discussed. So you assume a stepfather will be good enough for the child but a stepmother is bad. Who is the dad and who is the mum ? You all are saying the child belong to the OP since the wife owns her, you forgot the child also belong to the wife of the father since the husband owns her. So the COURT DONT ALWAYS CONSIDER THE biological MOTHER IN THAT CONTEST...ONCE THERE IS A MOTHER ( The new wife of the husband) and there is no contrary proof that she can't take care of her, the husband will get custody. However, custody is not a straightforward thing like that. The report of the welfare people will be taken into consideration but once again....there is no rule that the child must be with the mother except if the father us single

LaudableXX:
You are wrong, and you do not want to accept the truth. If a child is young, no welfare office will give custody to the father, especially if such a father has rejected the child. The mother is often told to take care of her child, especially if the child is underage. Go and do some research. They can only ask him to pay the cost of upkeep, of the child.

thanks. People like you just come online to talk. This is not divorce. Even in divorce, there is no such rule. It only applies if the man us not married such that he has no wife to take care of the child. A very good friend of mine just got custody of his 6yr old daughter from his former and threw a welcome party for them. Funny the other woman is not yet remarried so the husband claimed he has a more balanced home to care of her and provided proofs he had been paying school fees etc. They give to the mother if the husband is not married but no hard and fast rule. A 3rd party custody can be given to the grandmother. So don't just assume. Find out. When the child is less than 3yrs old, the tendency is the mother but not always. A 7yr old with married father.....na the father get him pikin
EDITED
The major reason why many mothers get custody in divorce cases is because the husband couldn't have been married before the divorce is completed so no way to prove he has a wife at home. In this case, they were probably not married. Just child out of wedlock. If it gets to welfare, they don't think twice before awarding custody to the father

LaudableXX:
Very rarely. The welfare office might ask the birth father to pay the cost of upkeep for the child, but they would usually ask the mother to take care of the child, especially if the child is underage, while the father has to pay alimony to the mother, for the upkeep of the children. Even in courts during a divorce, custody is given to the mother, as long as the child is still young, except in cases where the father fights the mother for custody, because he is richer and has more clout. He would however have to prove that the woman is an unfit mother, or she lacks the means to adequately take care of the kids.

you don't know what you are saying so I will swerve. Go and find out and stop saying what you don't know. A 7yr old whose father is married will be given to the father unless the mother can prove that the child will not be taken care of by the father

LaudableXX:
Oh, the OP has no responsibility to accept the child. And I am not playing any morality card on him. All I am saying is that, the mother has a responsibility to accept the child, and she lives under the OP's roof. After reporting at the welfare office, and they advise the child to live with the mother because she is underage, what next? Will the mother discard the child, because the OP doesn't want her in his home? The fact that the OP does not want her, does not mean the mother should abandon her own responsibility.

Go and find out. Since the father is now married....the welfare will ask his wife to take care of the child. In Africa, it is believed that the husband is the head of the house so he can ask his wife to take care of the child. No welfare will ask the OP to assume responsibility. They can only beg him. They can't force him but they can force the father.

LaudableXX:
It is not an unnecessary distraction. If the OP cannot take care of the girl, and the grandmother cannot do so, (for reasons he did not say), then what should the mother do? Leave her in the market, or dump her on the street? Why put the burden on the grandmother, when the biological mother is still alive and able to take care of her child?

My friend, learn how to properly advise people. The wife should report the case at the welfare office. They will invite both parents and resolve where the child should stay and who pay what bills. The OP has no responsibility to accept the child because the father rejected her. If he want, fine. If he doesn't want, you can't play morality card on him. It is evil

LaudableXX:
The grandmother might be old, weak and infirm. So you think they should put the burden on her? Isn't that rather illogical? Did she give birth directly to the child?

Millions were raised by their grandmothers, because such grandmothers were in good health or strong enough, to do so. Yes, the OP does not have a responsibility to father another man's child, but the mother of that child lives inside his house, as his wife. So what should the mother do? Abandon the child, too? If the wife cannot bring her child into that house, where should she keep the girl? On the street?

when you point to me where the OP said the grandmother is old then we can continue this discussion. Otherwise this is an unnecessary distraction

janellemonae:
All these rationalizations of deadened hearts. So pple should only render help because of what they can gain? There is a helpless 7yr old child with no one to turn to and u have the mind to tell her mother to abandon her.

Tufiakwa!

And who told you she has no one to turn to. I don't play online morality. She has her real father yo turn to. She has her grandmother to turn to. They all rejected her so the OP must accept her else he is evil. It is you guys that are evil. You are forcing somebody to accept something he doesn't want. If he now maltreat the innocent girl, you start calling for his head. If anything happens to that girl, the same father will come and start making trouble in the house. And how many homeless 7yrs old have you accepted into your home since you are so nice. You mean you don't know any child that really needs somebody like you to take care of them. Your heart must be dead too if you are yet to accept those 7yrs old who are homeless needing a roof into your home

LaudableXX:
Nobody is blackmailing the step-father into doing anything. People are just giving their suggestions and trying to give the man reasons, to help him make up his mind, on what to do. Check my comments on this thread. I never blackmailed him into anything. He is a grown man, who can consider all options before him, and take a decision.

Both the father and the mother, brought the child into this world. They both have a responsibility to take care of the little girl, not the grandmother. If the father is alive, but has rejected the girl, should the mother also reject her? The answer you give, will determine if you support doing good even when it is hard, or if you would just ignore an opportunity to do good, simply because you want to take the easy way out.

Nobody knows the age of the grandmother. She might be weak, elderly and in poor health, which means she might lack the energy or stability, to take care of an energetic, young child. If any step-child hates the stepfather, it simply means such a stepfather treated that child, badly. Same thing goes for step-mothers, too. No child will hate anyone who takes care of her, shows her love, compassion and care, and also trains her to a level where she can achieve the best education, available. So free your mind!

The mother is not rejecting her. In fact she wants to accept the child, but her new husband does not want her to bring the child, into their home. So what should she do?

So both parents have the Responsibility to take care of the child NOT THE GRANDMOTHER. You are correct. Just that if the grandmother has no morality to take care of the child, the Op too has no morality since he is not the father. You so easily absolved the grandmother saying it is not her responsibility so why should it be the responsibility of the OP to father another mans child. You talked about a judge raised by a stepfather. You only forgot that millions of others were raised by their grandmother too. So if the grandmother could reject without blinking, the stepfather shouldn't feel guilty if he doesn't want her too. My point is this.... it is not compulsory the OP must accept another mans child to his home and you shouldn't make him feel guilty. The house belong to both the husband and the wife...but the child doesn't belong to the two of them so the wife should not selfishly force what is not his on him unless he want it. The idea of using morality to force to take over a lifetime responsibility of taking care of another man child is evil.