Reply to Gene Hackman R.I.P.

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Gene Hackman R.I.P."

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I’m wondering if she even took Gene to doctors that often. Someone on the outside should have been monitoring his health. It doesn’t seem like he was getting the health care he needed. None of those pills found dealt with his heart disease. He only had a pacemaker. I could go on.

I hope this was not deliberate, but feel that she could have done far more for him. I think if doctors knew about the advanced dementia ( she probably hid it), then they would have been adamant about getting home resources for him, or suggest a memory care facility for him. It’s a tough thing to do, but we went both routes with my parents. Having care at home gave us more time with one parent, and saved a little cost, though home care is not cheap.

Memory care facilities are expensive, but help you gain your life back. 
[/quote]

He lived to 95. It's absurd to say he wasn't getting the health care he needed when in actuality his wife clearly did something right during their years of marriage considering his advanced age. [/quote]

I disagree. Didn’t the autopsy reveal that he was in very poor health? Heart trouble, advanced Alzheimer’s? Moreover, wasn’t he left alone while she ran errands? Wasn’t he found with an empty stomach?  Didn’t he have a pacemaker? How do you call this good health?

The doctors said that he was in very poor health at death.
And it was due to his being left alone that he died.

I think you think that living to the age of 95 meant that he did something right health wise. He may have just had great genetics, or God wasn’t ready for him to go yet.

Look at Jimmy Carter. He lived to 100. Others live past that. And some totally healthy people may succumb to death at an early age. It doesn’t mean that they didn’t live right or wasn’t getting the best health care.[/quote]

Are you blaming the wife for not feeding him when she'd already been dead for a week?[/quote]

Yep, though you are twisting my words.

He obviously could not feed himself. Do you think that she knew that?  Yet still ran errands away from the home and left him there by himself. She was his caregiver and had no plan b should anything happen to her or any delay with her returning.
That’s not right. It’s a certain degree of negligence or neglect.

As I shared, both of my parents had advanced Alzheimer’s. Eating, restroom function, bathing—those and functions decline over time. With one parent it was rapid. With the other, it happened over a few years.

He was totally dependent on her like a baby to a parent. If that parent dies, then the baby is without a provider.

It’s as simple as that. As a few of us have shared, he needed someone else watching out for him also. I am positive that a doctor would have recommended that. Under insurance, he could have had help paid for, given his condition.

She didn’t want this. And like it or not, she never expected a time where she could not provide and he would be alone. In her position of authority, she had options but ignored him. So yeah, she is responsible for his condition, else he would have had someone there who could have helped him and fed him.[/quote]

I'm sorry about what happened with your parents but this take is insane. I guess good for you if it makes you feel better to blame the woman for not having predicted that at age 65, she'd be the one to go first of an incredibly rare condition.

You don't know what levels of care were in place for when she ran errands. You have no idea. And you have no idea if for 15 years he'd been just fine sitting in a chair for an hour while she got meds for their dogs. And anyway he didn't die because she was at CVS! He died because she died! Of an incredibly rare disease that she didn't know she had!!

I don't think paying for care was the issue. He had $80 million or whatever. It seems like it was just a string of very unlucky things. [/quote]

Bullcrap! She ran at least four errands, one after another, the day he died. That’s about 2-5 hours away from home with no one there to look after him. I don’t care if it was unfortunate events, it was a possibility that she failed to plan for.  The resources are always there. She chose to have tunnel vision on this. [/quote]

No! Not the day HE died. The day SHE died. SHE died first. HE died a week later. And even if she'd been home, it seems likely she would have died - and then he would have died, too.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics