Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 13, 2015/09/14) */ Mountain Midwifery Center (MMC) has been in contact with [redacted] in multiple ways and cannot satisfy her unreasonable demandsShe is convinced she was risked-out of our care (she was not) and that we missed key medical information (we did not) [redacted] is still a candidate for out-of-hospital birth at our birth center, but wants a full refund for reasons we find very confusingShe came to us knowing the distance from her home in Fort Collins and knowing her insurance didn't cover our care, but she insists we have misled her and cheated her in some way We have refunded all her money except for an amount around $that is the contracted rate for our visits and careWe refunded $If she had remained with us for birth without insurance coverage, she would have owed an amount well over $and that's what Ms [redacted] was paying towards [redacted] could still be a customer and patient at MMC, but she alone is convinced there is a medical condition blocking her use of our facility and that MMC missed this condition in her medical historyThis condition does not exist Before her first appointment, we did review the medical records sent to us (by a nurse, not by a Certified Nurse Midwife) and no clear risk-out condition presented itselfAt her first visit, the Midwife then reviewed [redacted] 's records with her and established that she was a good candidateHer records include a detailed letter to MMC from an OB/GYN MD recommending her to MMC's care for an out-of-hospital birthThis is the physician she mentions in her complaint, "Mr [redacted] responded to my email by passing [redacted] responsibility to another doctors office who had only seen me for the first weeks of my pregnancy." This physician saw her for medical conditions prior to the pregnancy and had extensive knowledge of her obstetric and gynecological historyHe saw no condition blocking her from MMC's care and signed a letter stating so For reasons we do not know, Ms [redacted] sought the care and advice of another OB/GYN (we will call 2nd Physician) that she had never seen before while still in our careThis MD worked closely with MMC in the past and still collaborates professionally with our midwivesAt one of her visits with this MD, [redacted] described extensive uterine surgery by a 3rd physicianThe physician had not seen her medical history of surgeries and called us to warn us that she should be risked-out of our careWe never received her surgical history, but [redacted] thought we had ( [redacted] told her we had) and thereby agreed with her that we missed somethingWe then conducted a review of her records and spoke to the midwives that had met with her for visits (neither was [redacted] This review took some time because we were moving locations and some of our staff had summer vacationsAlso, Ms [redacted] had undergone uterine procedures that required we get as clear as information as possibleWhile Ms [redacted] did not hear back from [redacted] or another midwife, administrative personnel were in touch that we were reviewing her records and calling the MDs involved We never found any condition risking her out of our careHer original physician and the 2nd physician still recommend her to our careWe never received her surgical notes (from the 3rd physician), but the 2nd physician did speak to the operating 3rd physician and was given a verbal account that contradicts Ms [redacted] 's verbal account This complaint could have been addressed faster, but its complexity combined with our move and the poor response of the 3rd physician delayed our reactionMy words are taken out-of-context below, and I'm sure I could have written my response with more congeniality, but nothing I wrote is essentially wrongI am available to the Revdex.com and to Ms [redacted] for follow-up Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 15, 2015/09/15) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) This business has been nothing but careless and rude (as shown in the emails provided by me)The emails were direct screen shots and therefore were not taken out of contextsMy demands of a refund of approximately $is not unreasonable considering the fact that MMC's inability to read through medical history could have cost an actual human being her lifeI am not surprised by this responseThe entire duration of time spent emailing back and forth with the CEO was spent reading through his excuses for why MMC is not responsible for making sure their patients are safe to deliver thereHe tried blaming everyone from me to Dr [redacted] to now Dr [redacted] It's no one's fault but theirsIf Dr [redacted] hadn't have read through my medical history and had acted as careless as MMC I would be set to deliver there in two monthsAnd I'm not sure I would have livedThe consequences of that would cost MMC a lot more than $ Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 22, 2015/09/25) */ This statement is an outright lie and [redacted] knows it"They dropped the ball by not even glancing at my medical history once, yet they still are looking for ways to make it someone else's fault." Midwife [redacted] CNM went over [redacted] 's medical history in detail with [redacted] at her first visitThis review is well documented Also, we don't allow women to transfer late in pregnancy because we need time to review medical history (and in other ways ensure patient safety) [redacted] came to us very early in her current pregnancy In regards to [redacted] 's statements like, "Wanting to have the perfect natural water birth is not worth your life" and "I'm disappointed that a birthing center that makes themselves seem so perfect...," MMC does not market, sell or any other way use the phrase "perfect natural water birth" or "perfect birth experience" or any other phrase involving the word "perfect." We agree with [redacted] 's statement "hey Have a second opinion from your OB/GYN before you attend a single appointment here" for women with a medical history that is complicated or unclear about risks in any way What's confusing to us is this statement, "I'm grateful that my OB/GYN was smart enough to look at my medical history and see the danger I was in." Our version of this story can help illustrate our confusion OUR STORY - MMC's version of events with a key change made to simplify the story [redacted] is convinced she is a medical risk out and we did something wrong It's like [redacted] went to see a Personal Trainer (PT) who specializes in running, because [redacted] really wants to run [redacted] is responsible and asks her doctor (MD1) if running is okayMDsays yes and sends the PT a note saying so She sees the PT for a consultation; they don't run, but they make a running planThey meet twice to discuss the running plan and to check her vitals Then [redacted] goes to a second doctor (MD2) and tells that doctor she has some heart condition that she never told the PT or MDaboutMDcalls the PT and says [redacted] shouldn't run Based on this new condition, the PT agrees and says they won't run Then [redacted] calls the PT's boss and says she's owed a refundThe boss says, "No, our rates are clearly stated and we agreed to meet you based on MD1's recommendationIf you have that condition, MDshouldn't have recommended youSee MDwith your complaint." Meanwhile, MDreviews [redacted] 's medical history and cannot find any risky heart conditionMDcalls PT's boss and says "Sorry, everything looks okay." The boss speaks to [redacted] and says she's okay, but [redacted] says "No, I have heart condition and you should have never consulted with meIf we had met again and gone running I could have diedGive me a full refund or I will tell the Revdex.com that you are irresponsible and will kill people." PT = Midwife Running = Giving birth, going into labor END OF STORY That's why the crux of [redacted] 's complaint and this statement is so confusing to us, "I'm grateful that my OB/GYN was smart enough to look at my medical history and see the danger I was in." - The OB/GYN she was seeing before coming to MMC did not risk out [redacted] and actually recommended [redacted] to our care (MD= Dr [redacted] - The OB/GYN she went to see next listened to [redacted] describe an extensive surgery that would risk her out of his carHe called us to tell us her condition was too riskyHe then saw the actual surgical report and called us back to say she was not at risk(MD= Dr [redacted] So we don't know what OB/GYN has seen a "danger" for [redacted] She may still be eligible for a birth center birth We cannot provide documentation without consent from Ms [redacted] I felt confident listing the OB/GYNs involved because Ms [redacted] stated she had seen an OB/GYN physician I sincerely apologize to [redacted] for ever giving her the impression we were mocking herWe were notI was discussing her case with others because her complaint is very unique and different than any I've dealt with priorI did make a mistake dictating into my phoneI tried to dictate a response and finished with "Namaste," but the phone only picked up the last word All the best, [redacted] Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 24, 2015/09/30) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Dispute not settledWhen this business decides that it cares more about the health and wellbeing of its patient's rather than money I'll consider letting this go I request that this dispute remain public on the Revdex.com website to serve as documentation of how this business actually operatesIn the likely event that another woman has a similar issue in the future and chooses to sue, she should have this information as proof that this business ha a habit of putting financial gain before patient safety
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 13, 2015/09/14) */ Mountain Midwifery Center (MMC) has been in contact with [redacted] in multiple ways and cannot satisfy her unreasonable demandsShe is convinced she was risked-out of our care (she was not) and that we missed key medical information (we did not) [redacted] is still a candidate for out-of-hospital birth at our birth center, but wants a full refund for reasons we find very confusingShe came to us knowing the distance from her home in Fort Collins and knowing her insurance didn't cover our care, but she insists we have misled her and cheated her in some way We have refunded all her money except for an amount around $that is the contracted rate for our visits and careWe refunded $If she had remained with us for birth without insurance coverage, she would have owed an amount well over $and that's what Ms [redacted] was paying towards [redacted] could still be a customer and patient at MMC, but she alone is convinced there is a medical condition blocking her use of our facility and that MMC missed this condition in her medical historyThis condition does not exist Before her first appointment, we did review the medical records sent to us (by a nurse, not by a Certified Nurse Midwife) and no clear risk-out condition presented itselfAt her first visit, the Midwife then reviewed [redacted] 's records with her and established that she was a good candidateHer records include a detailed letter to MMC from an OB/GYN MD recommending her to MMC's care for an out-of-hospital birthThis is the physician she mentions in her complaint, "Mr [redacted] responded to my email by passing [redacted] responsibility to another doctors office who had only seen me for the first weeks of my pregnancy." This physician saw her for medical conditions prior to the pregnancy and had extensive knowledge of her obstetric and gynecological historyHe saw no condition blocking her from MMC's care and signed a letter stating so For reasons we do not know, Ms [redacted] sought the care and advice of another OB/GYN (we will call 2nd Physician) that she had never seen before while still in our careThis MD worked closely with MMC in the past and still collaborates professionally with our midwivesAt one of her visits with this MD, [redacted] described extensive uterine surgery by a 3rd physicianThe physician had not seen her medical history of surgeries and called us to warn us that she should be risked-out of our careWe never received her surgical history, but [redacted] thought we had ( [redacted] told her we had) and thereby agreed with her that we missed somethingWe then conducted a review of her records and spoke to the midwives that had met with her for visits (neither was [redacted] This review took some time because we were moving locations and some of our staff had summer vacationsAlso, Ms [redacted] had undergone uterine procedures that required we get as clear as information as possibleWhile Ms [redacted] did not hear back from [redacted] or another midwife, administrative personnel were in touch that we were reviewing her records and calling the MDs involved We never found any condition risking her out of our careHer original physician and the 2nd physician still recommend her to our careWe never received her surgical notes (from the 3rd physician), but the 2nd physician did speak to the operating 3rd physician and was given a verbal account that contradicts Ms [redacted] 's verbal account This complaint could have been addressed faster, but its complexity combined with our move and the poor response of the 3rd physician delayed our reactionMy words are taken out-of-context below, and I'm sure I could have written my response with more congeniality, but nothing I wrote is essentially wrongI am available to the Revdex.com and to Ms [redacted] for follow-up Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 15, 2015/09/15) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) This business has been nothing but careless and rude (as shown in the emails provided by me)The emails were direct screen shots and therefore were not taken out of contextsMy demands of a refund of approximately $is not unreasonable considering the fact that MMC's inability to read through medical history could have cost an actual human being her lifeI am not surprised by this responseThe entire duration of time spent emailing back and forth with the CEO was spent reading through his excuses for why MMC is not responsible for making sure their patients are safe to deliver thereHe tried blaming everyone from me to Dr [redacted] to now Dr [redacted] It's no one's fault but theirsIf Dr [redacted] hadn't have read through my medical history and had acted as careless as MMC I would be set to deliver there in two monthsAnd I'm not sure I would have livedThe consequences of that would cost MMC a lot more than $ Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 22, 2015/09/25) */ This statement is an outright lie and [redacted] knows it"They dropped the ball by not even glancing at my medical history once, yet they still are looking for ways to make it someone else's fault." Midwife [redacted] CNM went over [redacted] 's medical history in detail with [redacted] at her first visitThis review is well documented Also, we don't allow women to transfer late in pregnancy because we need time to review medical history (and in other ways ensure patient safety) [redacted] came to us very early in her current pregnancy In regards to [redacted] 's statements like, "Wanting to have the perfect natural water birth is not worth your life" and "I'm disappointed that a birthing center that makes themselves seem so perfect...," MMC does not market, sell or any other way use the phrase "perfect natural water birth" or "perfect birth experience" or any other phrase involving the word "perfect." We agree with [redacted] 's statement "hey Have a second opinion from your OB/GYN before you attend a single appointment here" for women with a medical history that is complicated or unclear about risks in any way What's confusing to us is this statement, "I'm grateful that my OB/GYN was smart enough to look at my medical history and see the danger I was in." Our version of this story can help illustrate our confusion OUR STORY - MMC's version of events with a key change made to simplify the story [redacted] is convinced she is a medical risk out and we did something wrong It's like [redacted] went to see a Personal Trainer (PT) who specializes in running, because [redacted] really wants to run [redacted] is responsible and asks her doctor (MD1) if running is okayMDsays yes and sends the PT a note saying so She sees the PT for a consultation; they don't run, but they make a running planThey meet twice to discuss the running plan and to check her vitals Then [redacted] goes to a second doctor (MD2) and tells that doctor she has some heart condition that she never told the PT or MDaboutMDcalls the PT and says [redacted] shouldn't run Based on this new condition, the PT agrees and says they won't run Then [redacted] calls the PT's boss and says she's owed a refundThe boss says, "No, our rates are clearly stated and we agreed to meet you based on MD1's recommendationIf you have that condition, MDshouldn't have recommended youSee MDwith your complaint." Meanwhile, MDreviews [redacted] 's medical history and cannot find any risky heart conditionMDcalls PT's boss and says "Sorry, everything looks okay." The boss speaks to [redacted] and says she's okay, but [redacted] says "No, I have heart condition and you should have never consulted with meIf we had met again and gone running I could have diedGive me a full refund or I will tell the Revdex.com that you are irresponsible and will kill people." PT = Midwife Running = Giving birth, going into labor END OF STORY That's why the crux of [redacted] 's complaint and this statement is so confusing to us, "I'm grateful that my OB/GYN was smart enough to look at my medical history and see the danger I was in." - The OB/GYN she was seeing before coming to MMC did not risk out [redacted] and actually recommended [redacted] to our care (MD= Dr [redacted] - The OB/GYN she went to see next listened to [redacted] describe an extensive surgery that would risk her out of his carHe called us to tell us her condition was too riskyHe then saw the actual surgical report and called us back to say she was not at risk(MD= Dr [redacted] So we don't know what OB/GYN has seen a "danger" for [redacted] She may still be eligible for a birth center birth We cannot provide documentation without consent from Ms [redacted] I felt confident listing the OB/GYNs involved because Ms [redacted] stated she had seen an OB/GYN physician I sincerely apologize to [redacted] for ever giving her the impression we were mocking herWe were notI was discussing her case with others because her complaint is very unique and different than any I've dealt with priorI did make a mistake dictating into my phoneI tried to dictate a response and finished with "Namaste," but the phone only picked up the last word All the best, [redacted] Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 24, 2015/09/30) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Dispute not settledWhen this business decides that it cares more about the health and wellbeing of its patient's rather than money I'll consider letting this go I request that this dispute remain public on the Revdex.com website to serve as documentation of how this business actually operatesIn the likely event that another woman has a similar issue in the future and chooses to sue, she should have this information as proof that this business ha a habit of putting financial gain before patient safety