Her center didn’t even employ doctors.
The title of your thread made me think:“Well, she wasn’t qualified but at least she was trying to help…”
105 Kids Died
Holy shit, stop helping them, Renee.
Thinking about white saviour complex, what has happened to Madonna’s girls’ schools in Malawi? That’s all gone a bit quiet.
Wow. That’s pretty awful.
In 2011, of the 129 children Bach took in, 20% died — nearly a third of them in the first 48 hours. In 2012, the death rate among these in-patient cases was 18%.
Because it’s about dead babies, I’ll refrain from making a joke.
Pretty sure all of them are now singing as her back up vocalists. Probably for $15/hr, which is so a living wage.
This is why I never donate to charity.
That’s why you shouldn’t donate to charities that you don’t know what they are doing.
There are good charities out there. Don’t paint them all with the same brush.
Why the hell is this person sleeping soundly in Virginia after murdering over 100 children?
Murder requires intent, and she had the opposite intent, so I wouldn’t call her a murderer.
But I wonder if a copy of Black Narcissus would have put the proverbial fear of God in this woman… who already had the literal fear of God in her.
Yeah, and who determines which charities are trustworthy and which aren’t?
Was she the cause of the deaths? If they died in the first 48 hours, it is possible they were already terminal. But, yes, manslaughter is on the table. Murder is also on the table in some jurisdictions if coupled with another crime (like child abuse).
That’s why I said YOU shouldn’t donate to charities that YOU don’t know what they are doing.
Now, if you don’t want to go check what a charity is doing with your money, it’s another story…
Ain’t nobody got time for that.
That’s what I was thinking. The pertinent question is: how many of them would have died if she hadn’t taken them in? These babies had illnesses. Incurable illnesses, in many cases. Where was the government in this scenario? Why were people bringing their kids to her instead of to a government facility? Perhaps because no such facility existed for people with no money?
She was working in a shithole area of a third-world country. Babies dying en masse is pretty much par for the course. But yeah, giving people blood transfusions without knowing what you’re doing … you’re going to get sued. Heart in the right place, but not much between the ears.
As you say the court case would need to focus on the expected death rate compared to the death rate in this woman’s organisation. Carrying out medical procedures with no medical training must surely be an offence. She was using Google for advice, FFS.
Uganda has no extradition treaty with the USA, though, so I’m not sure what the point of a trial is. Perhaps to raise awareness of idiotic white people thinking they are doing good in the name of the Lord? It seems to me the trial is more likely to highlight how useless Uganda law enforcement is.
Before she employed doctors the death rate was 18%. After she employed two doctors the death rate fell to 10%. Not sure what numbers were involved.
EDIT: 20% death rate in 2011 from 129 children. It seems pretty clear that a lack of doctors meant more children died, but if the parents had no other option? Would the death rate have been even higher if no treatment was available?
My guess is that the death rate would have been close to 100%. Poor people aren’t entirely stupid - their logic, no doubt, was that it was better to have their kid “treated” by some foreigner with a few random supplies and access to Google than to do nothing and hope for the best … which was their only other available option, it seems.
There’s another bit in there somewhere that suggests that “vulnerable” patients who make it to a government clinic can expect a death rate of … um, 20%.
What she was doing with her fake clinic was criminal by any rational standards. But in environments like that, rational standards don’t necessarily apply. I’d suggest it all went pearshaped the moment she decided to go to Uganda to fix the Ugandans.