Family safety concerns were dismissed; serious continuity-of-care failures
I am writing from the perspective of a family member of someone who has been admitted to this detox facility multiple times over the past year.
Our loved one has a documented history of severe alcohol use disorder, including prior ICU-level detox, a withdrawal seizure, and alcohol-related liver and gastrointestinal damage. Because of this history, continuity of care and accurate medication management are critical.
During a prior transition from this detox facility to a rehabilitation facility, seizure medication was not forwarded as part of the discharge or transfer process. As a result, our loved one experienced a seizure shortly after arrival at the rehab facility. This was deeply alarming and raised serious concerns about care coordination and patient safety.
Additionally, during a previous admission, our family was informed that our loved one was administered incorrect medication, including medication intended for another patient.
Given these experiences, our family attempted to contact the facility during the most recent admission to provide factual medical history and express safety concerns prior to discharge planning. We were told we were "not allowed to call and tell them how to do their job." Calls were not returned, and our concerns were not meaningfully engaged with.
We understand that addiction treatment is complex and that patients are often voluntary. However, dismissing family-provided medical history, refusing dialogue, and failing to ensure continuity of critical medications is extremely concerning -- particularly for repeat patients with known, life-threatening withdrawal complications.
Families are often the only source of longitudinal information about patterns, relapses, and prior medical emergencies. In our experience, that information was not welcomed here.
We hope this facility reflects seriously on its medication reconciliation, discharge coordination, and communication with families, especially when patient safety is clearly at stake. read more
