The COVID-19 pandemic saw unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems, and with it, a surge in reports of concerning hospital protocols. While many healthcare workers tirelessly fought to save lives, a growing number of families allege that rigid, financially incentivized protocols led to inappropriate and harmful treatment decisions, ultimately contributing to the deaths of their loved ones. Among these stories is that of Jessica Hallgren, a 39-year-old mother who died in December 2021 after being admitted to a Michigan hospital while pregnant.
According to her mother, Julie Schlipp, Jessica was admitted to Trinity Hospital on , and was immediately placed on a hospital protocol for COVID-19. Schlipp alleges that despite Jessica’s refusal, she was administered remdesivir, an antiviral medication that has been the subject of debate regarding its efficacy and safety, particularly in pregnant patients. Further, Schlipp claims hospital staff restrained Jessica when she attempted to advocate for herself and refused to consider alternative treatments.
The case highlights a disturbing pattern reported by families across the country: a perceived prioritization of standardized protocols over individualized patient care. Schlipp describes a situation where Jessica’s pregnancy, a condition demanding heightened caution, was seemingly disregarded. Instead, the hospital allegedly adhered to a rigid system that prioritized compliance with the protocol, even when it conflicted with the patient’s wishes and potentially compromised her well-being.
Remdesivir, while authorized for emergency use by the FDA, has been associated with potential adverse effects, and its benefits in treating COVID-19 have been questioned by some medical professionals. The drug’s use in pregnant women is particularly concerning, as its effects on fetal development are not fully understood. The decision to administer remdesivir, requires careful consideration of the potential risks and benefits, especially when a patient expresses opposition to the treatment.
Schlipp’s account details a rapid escalation of care that she believes contributed to Jessica’s decline. After being sedated and placed on a ventilator, Jessica never recovered. She died on , leaving behind a husband and children. The family’s grief is compounded by the belief that Jessica’s death was preventable.
The allegations surrounding Jessica Hallgren’s case echo similar claims made by other families who have lost loved ones during the pandemic. Emily Colts-Tegg, whose mother Eileen died in after receiving remdesivir, and Angela Michilli, whose husband Ralph died after being intubated and placed on a DNR order, have both publicly shared their experiences, alleging that hospital protocols contributed to their loved ones’ deaths. A case documented by Children’s Health Defense details the death of Jamie Kay Wylie, a 36-year-old mother who died after being treated with remdesivir and a ventilator in . Another account details a mother of two nearly dying after receiving Remdesivir without consent.
These cases raise serious questions about the role of financial incentives in shaping hospital treatment decisions during the pandemic. Schlipp asserts that the protocols were “financially incentivized and institutionally enforced,” suggesting that hospitals may have been motivated to follow certain treatment pathways due to reimbursement structures. This raises ethical concerns about whether patient care was compromised in pursuit of financial gain.
The stories also highlight the importance of patient autonomy and informed consent. Schlipp emphasizes that Jessica repeatedly expressed her refusal of certain treatments, yet her wishes were allegedly ignored. This underscores the need for healthcare providers to respect patients’ rights to make informed decisions about their own care, even in the midst of a public health crisis.
The experiences of Jessica Hallgren and other families serve as a stark reminder of the potential consequences of rigid, protocol-driven healthcare. While standardized protocols can be valuable tools for ensuring consistent care, they should not come at the expense of individualized patient assessment, informed consent, and compassionate communication. The loss of Jessica Hallgren, and the grief of her family, underscore the critical need for a healthcare system that prioritizes the well-being of each patient above all else.
The allegations detailed by Schlipp, and echoed in other accounts, point to several concerning trends during the COVID-19 pandemic: denial of early and individualized treatment, refusal of safer alternatives, forced isolation of patients, heavy sedation and premature ventilation, disregard for pregnancy and informed consent, and the influence of financially incentivized protocols. These issues demand further investigation and a commitment to ensuring that such tragedies are not repeated.
