Family's Plea for Medical Transparency
In July 2021,
my husband-- I'm sorry.
Brian McKeel
became seriously ill with COVID-19.
His symptoms began on July first and worsened rapidly.
By July tenth, he was admitted to the emergency room for low
oxygen levels.
He was then transferred to a hospital in Sarasota after testing positive for COVID.
Early in his hospitalization, Brian requested hydroxychloroquine
and budeside, but was told no, there was a better option,
and was treated with remdesivir, oxygen support, steroids, and
antibiotics.
Then he was moved to the ICU on July sixteenth.
On July twenty-second, Brian was placed on a ventilator
despite expressing his fa-- to his family members
that he did not want to be
ventilated.
They told us if he didn't immediately go on the vent, he would die.
Under duress, we were forced to make a decision without all
the facts.
The doctor was standing there with the ventilator as we spoke.
They said this would simply give his lungs a break.
We were not informed of the severity of his condition or
that he would be placed on
complete life support.
As Brian deteriorated, our family was told to prepare for the worst.
Believing we had exhausted all options, we requested ivermectin as a
compassionate treatment.
Physicians initially refused, citing
insufficient evidence of COVID-19 treatment.
One doctor ultimately agreed to administer a compassionate care dose on July
twenty-fifth,
followed by a second the next day.
After those doses, we were told Brian's fever had resolved,
his white blood count had improved, his kidneys were stabilizing,
he was tolerating food,
and certain oxygen me-measures had improved.
Despite these improvements, physicians refused to continue treatment,
stating it was outside their protocol and would not be approved.
Our family pleaded to the entire hospital care team, which included two
doctors, a vice president and chief medical officer of the hospital,
a pharmacist, a patient advocate, a lawyer, the risk
management team, and a Zoom attendant for continuation of
ivermectin.
We offered to sign waivers and emphasi-emphasized this was a life or
death situation.
The patient advocate said, "All they want is ivermectin." The
director asked the pharmacist about side effects, and after being told there
were none, he looked at the doctor and nodded, "Okay."
After those two doses were-- we were denied any additional doses of
ivermectin.
Brian may have also been a candidate for ECMO, which is an advanced life support
treatment offered at larger hospitals.
However, this possibility wasn't meaningful--
meaningfully discussed until his
condition had severely declined and it was too late for a transfer.
We were told by the doctor that none of the seven patients
that went on this
treatment in Sarasota survived.
Why were, why were transfer options not explored
sooner?
Due to hospital restrictions, I was unable to be by his side
or request for clergy
visitation. That was denied. And nursing staff told us to
limit calls to twice daily despite his critical condition.
We believe this deprived him of critical spiritual and family support during
most of this difficult time of his life.
Near the end, hospice care was discussed as a comfort measure, but
we were not clearly informed that this could involve-- would involve
life-sustaining interventions.
Only after further questioning did we understand those implications and Brian's
decline. My husband passed away on August third,
'21.
My young daughters and I were forced to say goodbye over a iPad.
We are asking for greater oversight,
transparency, informed consent protections,
compassionate treatment access, stronger patient and family
advocacy, as well as the right to try during medical
crises.
We firmly believe Brian may have survived had he not been denied the
medication that appeared to be helping.
Life-saving options should not be withheld when families consent
and no meaningful alternatives remain.
We believe a homicide occurred,
and we hope that justice will be served. Thank you.
End of transcript · 653 words