Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Natasha Richardson dies after skiing accident

This is topic Natasha Richardson dies after skiing accident in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005748

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 03-18-2009, 08:29 PM:

From reports, it sounded like a minor fall with minor injuries. This is shocking.

CNN.com article about Richardson's death.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 03-18-2009, 08:38 PM:

Very sad news, indeed. The 1998 remake of THE PARENT TRAP is one of my favorite movie and I try to watch it at least twice a year and one of the main reason I like about the film was Natasha Richardson's performance. A very tragic loss!

-Claude

Posted by Clint Koch (Member # 1179) on 03-18-2009, 10:21 PM:

I agree with Claude, I loved her performance in the Parent Trap. Besides being an extremley attractive woman she was a very gifted actress.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-18-2009, 10:41 PM:

Yes very sad indeed!! I wonder if she was wearing a helmet or any sort of head protection? She was taking a beginning ski lesson... you'd think that would be mandatory but then I don't ski...

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 03-18-2009, 11:22 PM:

The article seems to say that she just fell. It doesn't say whether she took a tumble or had a collision. The statement from the Ski Patrol said that she didn't seem to be injured. Maybe just banged up a bit.

I wonder if she didn't have something else wrong with her and the fall was caused by the illness and not the other way around.

Posted by Sally Ann Burgess (Member # 4746) on 03-19-2009, 05:23 AM:

Apparently, Natasha fell on the left side of her face, when they operated on her the surgeons found a blood clot on the left side of her brain. She suffered a major stroke during the procedure.
So, so sad. She could have been saved if she had gone straight to a doctor, and had the pressure relieved...but she laughed it off and signed off that she didn't need a doctor.
No she wasn't wearing a helmet.
Rest in peace, Natasha.

Posted by Todd McCracken (Member # 4718) on 03-19-2009, 12:56 PM:

Reminds me of my car accident, had the Indianapolis fireman not gone far and above the call to absolutely insist that I went to the hospital I would have died at home from internal bleeding, heck I almost died at the hospital.
Sad, very sad. She will be missed.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 03-19-2009, 02:20 PM:

NYC's Medical Examiner's office has ruled the death an accident. The cause of death was "epidural hematoma due to blunt impact to the head."

RIP Natasha

Posted by Jim Bedford (Member # 4) on 03-19-2009, 11:02 PM:

So sad. She came from a great acting family and just loved her work.

It was reported that she fell and hit her head and that she was NOT wearing a helmet. . . not a bad fall, but probably enough to mess with her brain. Because skiing doesn't have brake lights, turn signals, seat belts, airbags or rear view mirrors, helmets and release bindings are the few fail-safes a skier has. I don't know if it would have made a difference, but a helmet protects your brain better than anything else while skiing (other than good sense). I've skied an average of 80-85 days a year for 30 years and have worn a helmet every day for the last ten.

Everyone falls while skiing. Wear a helmet.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 03-26-2009, 10:00 PM:

It looks like Richardson's death is raising awareness about seeking medical attention for minor head injuries. This is one lucky little girl.

CNN.com article

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 03-27-2009, 09:36 AM:

Here's another article about how the Canadian socialized healthcare may have played a large part in her death. Apparently if she had been skiing in Aspen she may be fine today. Watch out America!!!!

Canadacare may have killed Natasha
by Cory Franklin

COULD actress Natasha Richardson's tragic death have been prevented if her skiing accident had occurred in America rather than Canada?

Canadian health care de-emphasizes widespread dissemination of technology like CT scanners and quick access to specialists like neurosurgeons. While all the facts of Richardson's medical care haven't been released, enough is known to pose questions with profound implications.

Richardson died of an epidural hematoma -- a bleeding artery between the skull and brain that compresses and ultimately causes fatal brain damage via pressure buildup. With prompt diagnosis by CT scan, and surgery to drain the blood, most patients survive.

Could Richardson have received this care? Where it happened in Canada, no. In many US resorts, yes.

Between noon and 1 p.m., Richardson sustained what appeared to be a trivial head injury while skiing at Mt. Tremblant in Quebec. Within minutes, she was offered medical assistance but declined to be seen by paramedics.

But this delay is common in the early stages of epidural hematoma when patients have few symptoms -- and there is reason to believe her case wasn't beyond hope at that point.

About three hours after the accident, the actress was taken to Centre Hospitalier Laurentien, in Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts, 25 miles from the resort. Hospital spokesman Alain Paquette said she was conscious upon reaching the hospital about 4 p.m.

The initial paramedic assessment, travel time to the hospital and time she spent there was nearly two hours -- the crucial interval in this case. Survival rates for patients with epidural hematomas, conscious on arrival to a hospital, are good.

Richardson's evaluation required an immediate CT scan for diagnosis -- followed by either a complete removal of accumulated blood by a neurosurgeon or a procedure by a trauma surgeon or emergency physician to relieve the pressure and allow her to be transported.

But Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts is a town of 9,000 people. Its hospital doesn't have specialized neurology or trauma services. It hasn't been reported whether the hospital has a CT scanner, but CT scanners are less common in Canada.

Compounding the problem, Quebec has no helicopter services to trauma centers in Montreal. Richardson was transferred by ambulance to Hospital du Sacre-Coeur, a trauma center 50 miles away in Montreal -- a further delay of over an hour.

Because she didn't arrive at a facility capable of treatment (with the diagnosis perhaps still unknown) until six hours after the injury, in all likelihood by that time the pressure buildup was fatal. The Montreal hospital could not have saved her life.

Her initial refusal of medical care accounted for only part of the delay. She was still conscious when seen at a hospital and her death might have been prevented if the hospital either had the resources to diagnose and institute temporizing therapy, or air transport had taken her quickly to Montreal.

What would have happened at a US ski resort? It obviously depends on the location and facts, but according to a colleague who has worked at two major Colorado ski resorts, the same distance from Denver as Mt. Tremblant is from Montreal, things would likely have proceeded differently.

Assuming Richardson initially declined medical care here as well, once she did present to caregivers that she was suffering from a possible head trauma, she would've been immediately transported by air, weather permitting, and arrived in Denver in less than an hour.

If this weren't possible, in both resorts she would've been seen within 15 minutes at a local facility with CT scanning and someone who could perform temporary drainage until transfer to a neurosurgeon was possible.

If she were conscious at 4 p.m., she'd most likely have been diagnosed and treated about that time, receiving care unavailable in the local Canadian hospital. She might've still died or suffered brain damage but her chances of surviving would have been much greater in the United States.

American medicine is often criticized for being too specialty-oriented, with hospitals "duplicating" too many services like CT scanners. This argument has merit, but those criticisms ignore cases where it is better to have resources and not need them than to need resources and not have them.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03262009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/canadacare_may_have_killed_natasha_161372.htm

[ 03-27-2009, 02:57 PM: Message edited by: Joe Tommassello ]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-27-2009, 11:08 AM:

quote: Joe Tommassello
Here's another article about how the Canadian socialized healthcare played a large part in her death. Apparently if she had been skiing in Aspen she may be fine today.

Well, yeah, if you can afford to ski in Aspen you can afford American health care. Take an average, middle class person. Give them the same head injury and see what happens. A lot of them won't even go to the doctor at all because we have "I can't afford to see a doctor" style rationing in this nation. They'll just die in bed at home.

Canada's health care system isn't perfect. No one has any grounds to imply our screwed up system is really any better.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 03-27-2009, 11:42 AM:

Apparently you didn't read the article. Let me restate a little more emphatically for the HARD OF HEAD...!!!!!

If she had been skiing almost ANYWHERE in the US she might very likely be fine today and at the very least alive. Once she started having symptoms it took FOUR HOURS to get her to a place where they could diagnose and treat her and by then it was too late. In the US she could have reached such a place in a hour from practically anywhere. And yes - this is a woman who could afford to ski at Aspen or anywhere in the world and in spite of her vast personal resources and being a well-known celebrity they STILL could not get her the services she needed!!!!

You know Bob - I am sure you are a nice guy and you are very knowledgeable about many things (or else a great bullshitter) but sometimes the level of your pompousness and ignorance is astounding.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-27-2009, 12:16 PM:

quote: Joe Tommassello
It hasn't been reported whether the hospital has a CT scanner

You're making some pretty big accusations and policy decision based on an opinion piece that states straight out it doesn't know the facts.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-27-2009, 12:50 PM:

quote:
Apparently you didn't read the article. Let me restate a little more emphatically for the HARD OF HEAD...!!!!!

I did read the article, you presumptuous asshole. I just didn't agree with it knee-jerk style in the manner you wished.

quote: Joe Tommassello
You know Bob - I am sure you are a nice guy and you are very knowledgeable about many things (or else a great bullshitter) but sometimes the level of your pompousness and ignorance is astounding.

When you paint your argument with cartoon like broad brush strokes they beg to get shot down.

BTW, there's lots of places here in the United States where you could get similarly hurt in a skiing accident and you would be just as fucked. For instance, try getting a serious head injury at a ski resort like Red River, New Mexico and see what happens.

I don't know all the details about Richardson's accident, but I seem to remember something about them skiing at a resort way the hell up North in Quebec far from a lot of things.

Note to moderators: this topic is getting steered into the obviously political debate about American health care versus socialized medicine. It clearly violates forum rules. I call for the article Joe posted to be deleted as well as the posts relating to it.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 03-27-2009, 12:52 PM:

Martin - I know they didn't have a helicopter to transport her in and after two hours she was still conscious and after five she was beyond saving. I think that combination of facts in itself supports the writer's premise.

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 03-27-2009, 01:31 PM:

He doesn't have a premise, he has an accusation that is built around not knowing if there was a CT available.

But Bob is right, this string is violating the no politics rule

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 03-27-2009, 02:55 PM:

Technically, Martin, you are only partially correct. You are ignoring all of the documented facts. It is a fact that there was no helicopter unit to move her expeditiously even after the seriousness of her injury was known. It is a fact that it took four hours between the time she knew she required care and the time the necessary care could be provided. It can be reasonably assumed that either the CT scan, the qualified medical personnel or both were not available until she got to Montreal which took four hours. It is a fact that the local hospital in a town of 9000 couldn't provide the needed treatment. These are all FACTS!!!!

In Pottsville PA - a town of approximately 14,000 - the hospital would have been able to treat her immediately. I have a girlfriend who is an ER supervisor there. Too bad NR wasn't skiing at Blue Mountain.

I had a friend in a horrendous car accident in a very rural area of Pennsylvania. Within 30 minutes of EMT arriving he had been helicoptered to a trauma center in Allentown PA. I'm just sayin' man!