Talk of The Villages Florida - What a Tragedy - why does a 3 year old needs 4 root canals ?

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)

- Medical and Health Discussion (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/medical-health-discussion-94/)

- - What a Tragedy - why does a 3 year old needs 4 root canals ? (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/medical-health-discussion-94/what-tragedy-why-does-3-year-old-needs-4-root-canals-100054/)

There are a lot of valid reasons for a young child to have serious dental problems and many involve congenital abnormalities with dentition. We were fortunate to have a pedi0dontist for just such problems when Helene was little.

There are a lot of reasons that we need to be very careful of anesthesia, and just WHO administers it, no matter how old we are.

There are no words for this loss. It is heartbreaking just to hear, to imagine to be the parents and family.

yeah, I wondered why such a young child would need root canals on teeth that will fall out in a few years too. The parents need to bear some responsibility in allowing dentistry like that in such a young child.

When I was little---pre-school! My 'baby-teeth' were all pretty bad. I wasn't a "bottle baby"--but breast-fed so it wasn't that. We lived in the country during a time when fluoride wasn't even a thought as that came a bit later. Anyway, because of the decay etc. I had to have some of those teeth pulled. It was a fore-taste of what my mouth would be like in the future. Eventually had extensive work done with root-canals, crowns and later oral-implants. Genetics plays a huge part of this. Also more recently have read that the health of our "gut" plays a part in this as well. (who knew?)

Anyway, my heart goes out to that sweet baby and yes, to her parents as well. They will never be the same after such a loss!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by doccrocker (Post 806822)

This is a terrible tragedy, and it is not something that should have occurred. I would like to examine and evaluate the office and its procedures personally, but that cannot happen, so obviously the court system will have to bring information to light that the news article did/could not. Allegations are a legal mechanism- a shot across the bow as it were. Not a wise idea to judge from a news report.

Quote:

Originally Posted by doccrocker (Post 806822)

By way of explanation for some of the concerns raised by this post:

Children can and do develop severe caries at very young ages, especially if they develop (as was mentioned earlier) bottle mouth syndrome. I have had to treat as young as 2 year olds for decay. It is especially prevalent where there is no fluoride in the drinking water. Acids in the milk or juice simply stay in place overnight eroding the teeth. Often, even when a parent is actually looking at the child's teeth the decay hollows out the inside without being visible until one day the shell of enamel just cracks like an egg. Children's "root canals" are usually called pulpotomies or pulpectomies because not all of the nerve is removed. Just the part in the crown of the tooth. This is in fact an in-office procedure and is very routine. We really want to keep the "baby" teeth until the permanent teeth come in because they hold space for the permanent teeth. Early removal of baby teeth winds up causing huge function problems due to crowding and frequently necessitating extensive corrections with extractions, braces (orthodontics) and sometimes even the need for surgeries to reposition the jaws.

Unfortunately, children (of all ages) do bring behavior problems to the office, so it is also commonplace for pediatric dentists to sedate them, sometimes with IV anesthetics, and sometimes with nitrous-oxide (laughing gas). Remember, no one really wants to go to the dentist, especially 3y/o who can't see the future, only the scary present. Better to get as much done as possible under the anesthesia. Would you really want to have open heart surgery for four clogged arteries and do two arteries today and next week go back under for the other two?

State laws vary, but nitrous can usually be used with a second person who monitors the patient while the work is being performed. True anesthesia (not just sedation) where the patient is unconscious definitely needs an anesthetist/anesthesiologist monitoring vitals. There are offices which are equipped with true surgical suites as one would find in a hospital but this is not commonplace. From the limited news report, I doubt that there was an allergic response to the anesthetic. I would be more inclined to think insufficient oxygen to the brain.

Sadly, people have a tendency to go with "If it doesn't hurt, there is not a problem and therefore, I can spend the money on a new TV/car/vacation/whatever , instead." While I agree that there are healthcare providers who are aggressive with treatment recommendations, ethical practitioners will offer a range of professionally acceptable choices, ranging from strictly maintenance wherein the minimum is done, to midrange which will help improve the overall condition, to high end which is intended to make the end result as ideal as possible. It is important for a dentist to explain all of the whats, whys, and hows , so the patient understands. However, there are people who only hear sounds but never listen to what's being said or simply choose to refuse to understand.

Thanks to poster(s)#8 mr & mrs bike for their insight on cause and effect and to 2BNTV for a phrase that should be equal to the golden rule , "People don't care how much you know, until they know how much you care".

Sorry if I rambled, but dentistry is extremely complex. I have no desire to condemn either side in this tragedy. Perhaps the parents allowed the situation to develop and perhaps not. Perhaps the dental office procedures were just not there. I don't know. But I would bet that the dentist is grieving as much as the parents, and not because of the lawsuit. Somebody died on her watch, and that will haunt her for the rest of her life.

I unintentionally walked on this fine post, so I am bumping it.

I was totally horrified when I read this story. Totally saddened.

Ok, now I have to put my oar in the water. First, for 2BNTV, I would never trust a dentist that allowed me to have my teeth cleaned at his/her office without examining me first if it's a first visit. Secondly, I have an analogy....Let's say you take your car to a mechanic because you have a hose leaking. The mechanic says "We can do this cheaply, I'll put this great tape over the busted hose and that should take care of it for a while." You go on your way, thinking it's taken care of and six months later you are back at the garage because the 'fix' is now broken again. This time, you take it to a better mechanic who tells you that he can repair it by replacing the hose. What he doesn't tell you, because he doesn't want to appear to be 'gouging' you is that the other hoses are looking pretty bad. He replaces the hose and you go on your merry way. Six months later, the other hose goes, only this time it causes your engine to overheat and destroys the engine. Let me ask, was the first guy doing his job? If the second guy had told you that yes, we can do a 'temporary' fix but in reality your car needs a major overhaul would you have thought he was trying to bilk you out of your money? It's quite similar in dentistry. A minor fix might work for a while but any good dentist is going to tell you what you need to do in order to make everything right. At that point, it's totally up to you. Don't you want to be educated? It's your health.

Great Post ! I worked for a Dentist for 30 years and a lot of people said let's just patch it for now. They were back in a few months with tooth ache's and a lot of pain. It is the Dentist responsibility to let the patient know, but it is their decision on what treatment to choose......