The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.


Jill Havern
Forum owner

One of your children go missing - who do you trust with your other two children?

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: One of your children go missing - who do you trust with your other two children?

Post by russiandoll on 12.07.13 10:47

Agreed : all that checking of breathing not just once but repeatedly, and you do not at first light get the 2 year olds to a hospital, not credible. As an anaesthetist, maybe an anaesthetist who was exhausted and stressed, her fellow anaesthetist and friend Fiona would have urged her to have the twins checked. Sedatives are administered according to a patient's size and an overdose would have been a real possibility.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: One of your children go missing - who do you trust with your other two children?

Post by PeterMac on 12.07.13 11:46

Here we are given “wandered into the bedroom” as the verbal phrase defining the action of the mother of an missing child checking that her two remaining children who she suspected had been anaesthetised,  were still alive !

A number of other points surely present themselves for further comment.

• The strange way in which the children were lying,. Though this position is in itself not unusual, there is the fact that both were lying in the same way
• The fact that “despite the noise and pandemonium they hadn’t stirred” still less woken.
• Kate describing this as “unnatural”.
• Kate placing the palms of hands on their backs, to check for “chest movement”.
• Her chilling use of the phrase “. . .basically, for sign of life”
• Her thoughts “Had the twins too  [been given some kind of sedative]  ?”

For many people this passage will sound quite extraordinary.   Doctors, nurses, police officers, ambulance crews, fire officers, paramedics, St John Ambulance staff, and many others are taught in their basic training about the importance of rousing people.   Drunks, drug addicts, people with head injuries, and those who have suffered smoke inhalation are roused, and in some cases are to be shaken into consciousness.  Failure to rouse a patient should lead to immediate medical assistance being sought, or transportation to the nearest casualty department.

Failure regularly to rouse someone in a police cell is a very serious disciplinary offence, the penalty for which may be dismissal from the service.

But we are told that a qualified anaesthetist merely “. .  placed the palms of my hands on their backs to check for chest movement, basically, for some sign of life”.   Both doctors, each of whom is a qualified anaesthetist, failed to address the simplest but the most important questions.
Why can they not be roused ?  
And then -
Given that they cannot be roused, what procedure, and / or what substance has been used to sedate these two children to this extent ?  

We now know that any sedation must have been administered within 1 minute and 20 seconds, in a narrow time window between Gerry McCann’s leaving the apartment, and Jane Tanner’s seeing the abductor carrying Madeleine, so obviously the substance was extremely fast acting, and very powerful.

The two anaesthetists did not have that information, but must nevertheless have believed that sedation had occurred within the previous half hour between Oldfield’s visit and Kate’s.

So what precisely did the two qualified anaesthetists assume had been used, and how did they suppose it had been administered ?
Why did they accept that the dosage had been exactly correct for children of this age and size ?
Was it still being absorbed and was the level in the tissues still increasing ?  
Were they coming round, or were they drifting into even deeper level of unconsciousness, coma, and possible death ?
What were the likely or possible side effects - vomiting, breathing difficulties, lung congestion, ventricular or atrial fibrillation, brain damage, liver or kidney failure, or any of the many other possible sequelae that both will have studied at length and been examined on in detail.
What precisely did they identify or diagnose ?

It is, of course, beyond belief.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 144
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: One of your children go missing - who do you trust with your other two children?

Post by aquila on 12.07.13 11:59

@PeterMac wrote:
Here we are given “wandered into the bedroom” as the verbal phrase defining the action of the mother of an missing child checking that her two remaining children who she suspected had been anaesthetised,  were still alive !

A number of other points surely present themselves for further comment.

• The strange way in which the children were lying,. Though this position is in itself not unusual, there is the fact that both were lying in the same way
• The fact that “despite the noise and pandemonium they hadn’t stirred” still less woken.
• Kate describing this as “unnatural”.
• Kate placing the palms of hands on their backs, to check for “chest movement”.
• Her chilling use of the phrase “. . .basically, for sign of life”
• Her thoughts “Had the twins too  [been given some kind of sedative]  ?”

For many people this passage will sound quite extraordinary.   Doctors, nurses, police officers, ambulance crews, fire officers, paramedics, St John Ambulance staff, and many others are taught in their basic training about the importance of rousing people.   Drunks, drug addicts, people with head injuries, and those who have suffered smoke inhalation are roused, and in some cases are to be shaken into consciousness.  Failure to rouse a patient should lead to immediate medical assistance being sought, or transportation to the nearest casualty department.

Failure regularly to rouse someone in a police cell is a very serious disciplinary offence, the penalty for which may be dismissal from the service.

But we are told that a qualified anaesthetist merely “. .  placed the palms of my hands on their backs to check for chest movement, basically, for some sign of life”.   Both doctors, each of whom is a qualified anaesthetist, failed to address the simplest but the most important questions.
Why can they not be roused ?  
And then -
Given that they cannot be roused, what procedure, and / or what substance has been used to sedate these two children to this extent ?  

We now know that any sedation must have been administered within 1 minute and 20 seconds, in a narrow time window between Gerry McCann’s leaving the apartment, and Jane Tanner’s seeing the abductor carrying Madeleine, so obviously the substance was extremely fast acting, and very powerful.

The two anaesthetists did not have that information, but must nevertheless have believed that sedation had occurred within the previous half hour between Oldfield’s visit and Kate’s.

So what precisely did the two qualified anaesthetists assume had been used, and how did they suppose it had been administered ?
Why did they accept that the dosage had been exactly correct for children of this age and size ?
Was it still being absorbed and was the level in the tissues still increasing ?  
Were they coming round, or were they drifting into even deeper level of unconsciousness, coma, and possible death ?
What were the likely or possible side effects - vomiting, breathing difficulties, lung congestion, ventricular or atrial fibrillation, brain damage, liver or kidney failure, or any of the many other possible sequelae that both will have studied at length and been examined on in detail.
What precisely did they identify or diagnose ?

It is, of course, beyond belief.

According to Fiona Payne's rogatory, Kate came into their bedroom (Fiona & David) early in the morning of the 4th (this would have been just before leaving to search) and asked Fiona to take care of the twins - so by 10.10am the twins were back in the creche.

It's more than beyond belief.

aquila

Posts : 7957
Reputation : 1182
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: One of your children go missing - who do you trust with your other two children?

Post by russiandoll on 12.07.13 12:00

anyone any idea why it was necessary for both parents to leave their important meeting for the inconvenience of picking up the twins? During the holiday one had done so, and if the meeting so important they had to phone around friends/helpers to make the twins' lunch, and that in itself according to Kate was a work-up.. .why did one not remain at the meeting and he other go pick up the children?

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: One of your children go missing - who do you trust with your other two children?

Post by aquila on 12.07.13 12:07

@russiandoll wrote:anyone any idea why it was necessary for both parents to leave their important meeting for the inconvenience of picking up the twins? During the holiday one had done so, and if the meeting so important they had to phone around friends/helpers to make the twins' lunch, and that in itself according to Kate was a work-up.. .why did one not remain at the meeting and he other go pick up the children?

 Why wouldn't arrangements for the children have been made before the meeting? It's not like the McCanns were short of friends, relatives and professionals to help is it? There were constant relatives and friends flying in an out of Portugal to help and support them. They had a family liaison officer too.

aquila

Posts : 7957
Reputation : 1182
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum