Family says U-M doctor hit teenage gunshot wound victim
A doctor at the University of Michigan's University Hospital is accused of grabbing the arms of a teenage gunshot wound victim and hitting him while the teen was being treated there, according to a WDIV report.
Lukequan Williams, 19, could not move from the neck down following a gunshot and was being treated at the hospital Wednesday afternoon when he was assaulted, his parents told Click on Detroit. Williams was on speaker phone with his parents to complain about his treatment at the hospital when he began arguing with doctors and the line went dead before he was assaulted, the report said.
The station reported that the university released this statement Thursday: "We are cooperating fully with the UM Department of Public Safety in its investigation of this incident, and doing an internal review of our own. We have removed the physician in question from duty while these investigations continue."
Comments
4Reason
Sat, Mar 3, 2012 : 9:38 p.m.
I've known lots of doctors, and none of them would ever assault a patient. This sounds farfetched to me. Why would anyone need to assault someone who couldn't move? On the other hand, I've known patients that had a few loose connections in their brain wiring and would accuse people in their lives of almost anything, for no reason a normal person could predict. Sometimes frustration with a situation can lead people to lash out at whoever happens to be around......... How about security cameras? How about some more investigation & information? What is the other side of this story?
Tru2Blu76
Sat, Mar 3, 2012 : 4:39 p.m.
Still have seen no report on how or when or under what circumstances Mr. Williams received his gunshot wound. Lots 'n lots of "????" here. Just kidding but, from recent reports coming out of U of M Hospital: there could be a giant success coming for anyone using that hospital as the basis for one of those TV Hospital drama series. Didn't George Clooney get his start in one of those hospital dramas? Just think: the U of M Hospital ads featuring xylophone renditions of the Victors would go nation wide!
UlyssesWrong1
Sat, Mar 3, 2012 : 2:05 p.m.
It's sad that people would blame a paraplegic for getting abused by a staff member of a hospital. Seriously, what's wrong with you people?
ranger007
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 9 p.m.
Something smells funny with this...jus sayin
Sandra Samons
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 7:09 p.m.
The reporting here is, to put it mildly, less than adequate. We don't even know if the patient was paralyzed by the bullet or was already paralyzed before being shot. But, it also tries my patience when someone suggests that the reason the patient was shot might justify the behavior of the physician, assuming he really did behave so abusively to his patient. Physicians are not only required to treat people they like and approve of, but to treat anyone in need of care, and that includes treating them with respect even if they behave badly to the physician, as well as providing good medical care. There are many possible reasons a person might behave badly toward a physician, such as having a mental disability, being in shock from a wound, or even being drunk, but physicians should still have their own standards of behavior that are not contingent on the behavior of the patient. And, yes, paralyzed people CAN use telephones! It would be nice if the reporter could report on the TWO stories contained in this incident: what happened to the patient that resulted in his being in the hospital, and what happened after he got there.
alarictoo
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 5:03 p.m.
Does anyone else wonder why is the "newspaper" in our town, yet again, posting details they gleaned from the Detroit television stations? How is it that they do not "break" these stories? And, even when they carry the story, it is all a summary of the story posted by another news agency. I think @Irwin Daniels summed it up quite succinctly: "annarbor.com is a blog and they decide when/if they will post something." So, save yourself the effort annarbor.com we all already know the URL's of the Detroit newspapers and television news. We have to.
BornNRaised
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:44 p.m.
I don't care how bad a story first sounds. There is ALWAYS 2 sides to every story. We're only hearing a single sided argument right now. If the Doctor was wrong, then throw the book at him. However, if this is a bogus case, then throw the book at the kid. Since we we're children (at least for me) we were always taught to hear both sides and get all your facts. This entire thing is only single sided.
Irwin Daniels
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:28 p.m.
@Trespass and @Snowflake Both your lists are identical, the first four are still under investigation and the crimes are alleged - nothing at this time has gone to trail. You know the whole "Innocent until proven guilty" that happens to be part of the legal system here in the United States annarbor.com is a blog and they decide when/if they will post something, an example is when the Chief of Police was stepping down most people knew about him stepping down and it was not put into print here for a few hours after the fact. Is this then a cover-up? I do not know anyone personally involved with the child porn - I am guessing that you do not know the full story either and that is why I would not call it a "cover-up" until the facts are known.
V
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:27 p.m.
Family says...
Chelsea8226
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:04 p.m.
I'm not condoning the alleged actions of the physician. I think there are two sides to this story and we are only hearing one side of it. We don't know the full history of this patient and his interactions with staff or the hospital. I am a nurse at a local hospital and often feel threatened in my job. Patient and their families are often frustrated with a diagnosis and things that are out of their control and take it out on hospital staff. We have had patients and families spit on staff, throw feces at staff, verbally and physically assault staff and threaten to bring in guns and shoot at staff. Over a holiday last year my unit was on lock down because a family member of a patient of ours had threatened to come in with guns and shoot the staff. I'm not saying two wrongs make a right or an eye for an eye but it seems there is more to this story then we know. I think that patients, their families and hospital staff all deserve a safe environment and each deserve respect. I'm interested to know the other side of this story; what was done by both parties for it to escalate to this.
gofigure
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:20 p.m.
"He was grabbing his arms and yanking all over my son, basically," said Luneshia Williams. "I didn't see that. I only know what I heard. I wasn't here." Above quote straight from the WDIV article. Key words... "I Wasn't There".
Pickforddick
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:19 p.m.
Does this story make sense at all?
Pickforddick
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:04 p.m.
I believe when the facts get straightened out we will have a whole different perspective on this which will show how right the Dr was.
mhirzel
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:11 p.m.
"Thank you! Your comment is awaiting approval." Special treatment for UM?
Sciomanone1
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:11 p.m.
It looks like another situation where the U of M will pay off the patient and his family and the Doctor will be fired, that is the U of M way, pay off the people that have a case against them before it makes the News That is all I should write, because I am sure the Ann Arbor new will delete me my comment.
gofigure
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:07 p.m.
"grabbing the arms of a teenage gunshot wound victim..." I'm making an assumption here but, if patient is paralyzed from the neck down, why grab his arms? He can't move them. Did this allegedly happen during triage treatment? Was the patient under the influence of anything? Too many unanswered questions.
Allison Camara
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:35 p.m.
So for most of these comments are asking how he was able to call, you can use a phone and not able to move your body, haven't you seen the UofM commercials for Mott with the young girl using the puff and blow machine, don't know the technical name, to write in Microsoft word you can use those to do lots and lots of things, one episode of Extreme Make Over Home Edition they made a batting machine work off of the puff machine so the father could toss his son a base ball and play with him. So you can still use the phone no problem there and it would have to be on speaker phone. Also it doesn't matter how he got shot or why he got shot it seems like he has been in the hospital for a while since he is learning to do things on his own, and also according to his facebook page, at least since January. I'm sure more will come out of this and we will be seeing more on the story and it seems that this young man has been going through a lot and I hope he gets better and has learned a lesson from being shot and that he can now make a difference in other young men's lives to show them what playing with guns can lead to.
joe.blow
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:22 p.m.
Still doesn't make sense, why grab the arms of a paralyzed patient? If you had to hold the arms of the patient, why, was he trying to pull lines out while delirious off morphine/pain/what ever drug he might have been on? If this dude was trying to pull out an IV, maybe the doctor was holding his arms to protect him. The hit to the face is questionable, if the doc had to hold the patient down, I'm assuming it wasn't easy, the hit to the face might have been the doc reaching for his arm and missing. Too many details missing, too many scenario's. Why is this a story? HIPAA will prevent a real response to this story, so aa.com will only ever give one side.
Wolf's Bane
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:21 p.m.
What kind of Zoo is this place: 1. Doctor hits quadraplegic patient 2. Male patient gropes femal patient 3. Male visitor gropes female patient 4. Child porn goes unreported. 5. Supicious death goes unreported
Lisa
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 8:15 a.m.
we have to wait for approval of our comments its U of M you know they own the toen and don't pay taxes so with the hellp of the reporters all comments are being monitored.
seldon
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 5:41 p.m.
They're being monitored because this is annarbor.com, and they are excessively careful about comments on crime stories. They don't just censor stories about UM, trust me.
ViSHa
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:54 p.m.
I don't think they are being monitored because it is UM, see the comments on Click on Detroit and you will see why these are monitored.
jcj
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:46 p.m.
While I get frustrated with the censors on this forum. I had no idea that the U of M controlled what we can say! Forget all the conspiracy theories! I have heard some of the wildest accusations ever in this thread!
walker101
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:01 a.m.
"DUH" why would the Doctor have to grab his arms if he could not move from the neck down??
Julie lastly
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 3:48 a.m.
Mr. Williams has posted what has happened on his Face Book site. Hopefully, he is not paralyzed.
gofigure
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:10 p.m.
allegedly happened. Nothing has been proven yet.
Sallyxyz
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 3:45 a.m.
Too many facts missing here. How did the paralyzed patient dial a phone and conduct a phone call? Who was holding the phone for him? In addition, in my experience as a patient in the UM ER, there are tons of people around all the time. There is little privacy there, as staff and residents are coming in and out of the area where the bed is, and walking around all over the place as well. It is unlikely the doctor was alone with the patient for any period of time, or not being observed by other staff. Let's also find out why this person was shot, and if he was behaving appropriately in the ER. Patients need to be respectful, as well as the docs and staff. Emergency rooms are chaotic places in the best of circumstances. AA dot com needs to do a follow-up.
justcurious
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:24 p.m.
Speakerphone.
DwightSchrute
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:10 a.m.
You have never had exposure to 'sip and puffs' for paralyzed patients? Wish aa.com would explain how the patient was able to place a call so the most popular comment and most ignorant one of the bunch quits getting so many likes.
ViSHa
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 3:04 a.m.
Has it been reported whether the apology the mother said they received was an apology from the specific doctor or a general apology from UM Hospitals?
justcurious
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 3:39 a.m.
I believe the other article said that the Dr. apologized.
RJA
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:33 a.m.
There are to many un-knowns here. We don't know for a fact that he was on the phone, we don't know what started the argument, We don't know if there was a cause for the doctor to hit him, (if in fact he did). With the same token, I don't think a doctor has a right to hit a patient. (restrain) I agree with, but believe it would take more than one person. Hopefully this case will be resolved soon.
JustMyOpinion
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:12 a.m.
The stated facts and the recounted verbal statements don't seem to jive here. In the full article the mother states she heard the assault. In the written sequence, it is stated that the phone was disconnected before the assault. These statements seem to be opposing and will no doubt be used to impute someones credibility. There is also a serious lack of facts: Did the victim suffer further injury? Was the doctor charged with assault? Was the doctor the only staff member present? What was the argument about? I would want to see a lot more information in order to find anyone credible.
trespass
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 10:19 a.m.
The original story says that charges are pending at the Washtenaw County Prosecutor's Office. Thus, the DPS have asked for charges but they cannot bring charges themselves. That is done by the prosecutor.
SW40
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:55 a.m.
Trespass, While you are correct that the legislation giving Michigan's universities the ability to control there own university police departments was passed in 1990, many universities including EMU and MSU had police departments prior to 1990. In the years before the public act being passed the university departments received there powers from the county sheriff. The departments still answered to the board of regents, President etc... The problem isn't having a university police department, the problem is allowing University presidents to pull the strings. Having worked in law enforcement for many years I must tell you that city councils and mayors' offices are not much better. We all witnessed how Chief Jones bowed to the politicians in Ann Arbor.
Eep
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 6:43 p.m.
@SW40, Of course Trespass is wrong when he says that University police officers "could not be fully sworn and working for the university department until 1990," since almost every University in the state (other than UofM) had exactly that arrangement. However, his larger point (I can't believe I'm saying this) is actually correct. Before 1990, when the University officers derived their authority from the local police chief or sheriff, there was an external check on the power of the University police. The officers worked for the University and not for the sheriff, and the sheriff had absolutely no day-to-day involvement in supervising them, but the sheriff COULD revoke the status of an individual officer or the University police force as a whole if he chose to - for example, if he felt the officers were abusing their authority or not being properly trained or supervised. I'm not saying it happened often (or that it ever happened), but it was a possibility. Now, the external check on the University's power has been removed, and the officers answer only to the university's governing board and a relatively powerless oversight committee elected within the University.
SW40
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:28 p.m.
Trespass, Prior to 2000 MCOLES or Michigan Commission on Law Enforcement standards was known as MLETC so perhaps that is why you are having a hard time finding any information. Secondly, my definition of fully sworn police officer is one who is a police academy graduate and has been given full arrest powers in the state of Michigan upon being hired by a law enforcement agency. Now I realize you hate to be wrong but you are in this case. Prior to the public act allowing Michigan Universities to govern their own police departments many of them already were by receiving there police powers from county sheriffs and city police departments. You are confusing how it was done. Prior to the state allowing it the jurisdiction for the officers working on the campus wether it be EMU or WSU or MSU their authoritycame from either the city or county they worked in, however the officers did not work for the county sheriff or city police chief. All of the campus police departments prior to 1992 still functioned as they do now. If you look at CMU they have had countywide jurisdiction for years, EMU used to have countywide jurisdiction now they are fully sworn in Ypsilanti in stead, WSU is fully sworn and has full jurisidiction in the city of Detroit as they always have. Point being that a county sheriff wasn't walking onto a University campus 25 years ago and deputizing security guards. The University Police departments minus UofM were still hiring police academy graduates as Fully sworn police officers whose powers of authority came from the Sheriff, however the sheriff or local police chief were not involved in the operations of the University Police department at all, and the officers chain of command remained within the University, nothing changed in 1992 except that it was recognzied that officers did not have to seek there arrest powers outside of the University and now those powers come directly from the University board of regents.
trespass
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 10:16 a.m.
@SW40- Since the law that authorized 4 year universities, MCL 390.1511, was not passed until 1990 and since MCOLES will not license an officer unless they work for a qualified law enforcement agency, I would question your definition of a fully sworn officer working for the university. They may have had the qualifications or they may have worked for the Sheriff but they could not be fully sworn and working for the university department until 1990. I have seen the letter from MCOLES to EMU telling them that they will no longer license officers whose authority does not stem from their employer. That is why every 4 year university was eventually required to establish their own police department.
SW40
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 7:33 a.m.
Actually to be even more correct Wayne State and EMU both had their own police departments with their won fully sworn police academy graudated police officers working on their campuses in the late 1960's. Your analysis that EMU just recently acquired their own police department is extremely inaccurate. The University of Michigan is a more accurate example. AAPD was patrolling UofM's campus and working with UofM security until the early 1990's.
SW40
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 7:23 a.m.
EMU and MSU did not have security guards prior to 1990 they had fully sworn police officer who were yes deputized by the County Sheriff but trust me the Sheriff was not in their chain of command and he was not involved in there daily operations. All of the police officers at places like EMU, CMU and MSU were police officers not deputized security guards, meaning they were all police academy graduates. You are correct that prior to 1990 AAPD did indeed patrol UofM. I don't really disagree with your point about University Police departments just stating facts. Many of the other Universities in Michigan have been hiring fully sworn officers prior to 1990 and recieving there police powers from the sheriff, not deputizing security guards.
trespass
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:12 a.m.
EMU and MSU had the same thing that UM had prior to 1992. In fact, EMU did not have an independent police department until fairly recently. They all had security guards who were deputized by the County Sheriff but he could also take away that authority so it is not really true that they answered solely to the Regents or President.
trespass
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:17 a.m.
1. Doctor hits quadraplegic patient 2. Male patient gropes femal patient 3. Male visitor gropes female patient 4. Child porn goes unreported. 5. Supicious death goes unreported How safe do you feel at UM hospital? I wonder how many doctors are worrying about whether to refer their patients to UM hospital.
seldon
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 5:40 p.m.
We don't know what security problems other hospitals in the area may be having which haven't been reported.
trespass
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 4:17 p.m.
@sh1- Many other regional hospitals have treated thousands of patients succesfully as well without having such a disfunctional security system.
sh1
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:26 p.m.
Please don't ignore the thousands of patients treated successfully at this outstanding hospital without incident.
Monica R-W
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 8:24 a.m.
We'll I don't know if Ann Arbor.com just reporting stories lately on U of M Hospital or are more stories just occurring in a short time-frame. Either way the timing is quite interesting.
ElCamin0
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:17 a.m.
AnnArbor.com... Instead of censoring everyone's comments you don't agree with why don't you do a little investigative journalism and tell us why Lukequan was shot in the first place and why anyone would do that to an "innocent" 19 year old boy... That way the REAL facts will Be exposed and your readers can gain some enlightenment on the situation.
donderop
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:08 a.m.
If the patient couldn't move from the neck down, how could he hold a phone to talk to his parents?
joe.blow
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:15 p.m.
Still doesn't make sense, who dialed the phone?
Julie Baker
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:37 a.m.
The Click on Detroit story says the parents were on speaker phone. We have added this detail.
DwightSchrute
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:53 a.m.
Maybe he couldn't hold a phone. Go look up technology for paralyzed patients donderop.
lynel
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:18 a.m.
He had his lawyer make the call.
ViSHa
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:54 a.m.
I still do not understand this UM DPS. If there is an alleged assault, the Ann Arbor Police are not in on this, only the UM DPS? I saw the mother on Click on Detroit. By the way she was speaking, I would think she would want to press charges. Very confused how this works.
Harry
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 8:34 p.m.
Maybe he used his nose or tounge to dial?
seldon
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 5:39 p.m.
UM DPS is an actual police department, with sworn officers. Hospital Security is a security department, with staff who are not sworn officers. They are not the same. This case, if it is being investigated by UM DPS, is in fact being investigated by a police department.
Ignatz
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 5:13 p.m.
To chime in on Sandy Castle's comment, the U-M Police were trained under the direction of the Michigan State Police. They have full powers of arrest.
ViSHa
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 3:07 a.m.
Thanks. And good point Ms. Castle about the victim being over 18.
treetowncartel
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:41 a.m.
It is Geofrrey, not Jeffrey
Daisy1
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 2:25 a.m.
UM DPS investigates and polices all UM property including the hospital. Mall guards with guns if you ask me....but whatever
Sandy Castle
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:21 a.m.
University of Michigan Department of Public Safety IS a legitimate police agency and their cases are prosecuted by the Washtenaw County Prosecutor's office. They handle everything that happens at UM. The mother has no right to press charges since her son is 19 years old.
trespass
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:20 a.m.
This is one of the problems with the state legislature giving universities the authority to have their own police departments. Conflicts of interest. It was not until 1990 that the legislature passed this legislation. Universities did well enough with local police until then but UM wanted the AA police to arrest students in possession of marijuanna and AA police would only give them a ticket. Thus was born campus police.
lynel
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 1:17 a.m.
Maybe Jeffery Feiger can explain it to you.
jcj
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 12:27 a.m.
You might as well close the comments now because we will not be able to say what we think about this!
Joy Bash
Fri, Mar 2, 2012 : 6:04 p.m.
What ever happened to our first amendment rights?