'Hospital blunders meant my baby bled to death': Father's grief as NHS staff ignore plea to treat nine-day-old son
These sort of stories really get on my nerves. Okay, it's tragic for the family to lose their son but what we need is a thorough, logical investigation of what happened- the last thing we need is for people to get emotionally involved with it.
Now, I'm not a doctor and I have no idea whether he could have been saved or not.
But while Joshua's temperature fell, his family's pleas for him to be examined by a doctor were ignored.
Mr Titcombe said: 'My concern for Joshua was immense. I repeatedly asked if he needed antibiotics and was very surprised to be told he didn't.
It sounds to me like he was seen by a doctor who decided that antibiotics weren't the course of action to take at this stage. I'm sure giving antibiotics to a premature baby isn't something you want to do unless you really have to.
'They told us he had a problem with his heart, then with his oesophagus. All the time I just suspected he had the same infection as his mother.'
I'm sure there have been many times when a child's parents have suspected some ailment and turned out to be completely wrong.
It became clear the next day that Joshua was unwell - and at this point he was given antibiotics before being airlifted to Manchester and then Newcastle.
In Newcastle consultants said his problem was an untreated pneumococcus infection - the same condition as his mother. Joshua died a week later in October 2008 on a life-support machine.
So the child was given antibiotics once it became clear what was happening but unfortunately died a week later. He may well have died even if he had been given antibiotics sooner.
Mr Titcombe said: 'His observation chart, which I saw when we were in the hospital, has been lost and we have had no explanation as to how this could have happened.
Anything which could lead to the identification of individuals who failed him has mysteriously disappeared. The records would have answered a lot of our questions.'
A lot of the armchair experts reading this article will jump on this fact!
I don't mean to sound like a heartless bastard but this sort of article- emotionally charged, very one sided- is completely unhelpful. Maybe the doctors did fail the baby but, given the Mail's record of artistic licence I wouldn't like to make any judgements of my own from this story. Better to wait for the official report that's no doubt forthcoming.
No doubt the comments will be the usual sort, about 'failing NHS', 'I don't trust doctors blah blah blah' and that sort of thing.
EDIT: After reading elsewhere on internet some findings in the investigation it would appear that there were some mistakes made and standard practice not followed. Even so the emotional reaction that the Mail readers will shortly be spewng out of their mouths will be completely non-constructive.