Case Study
A Child Dies Because of Delayed Treatment
A five-year-old child was taken to a hospital emergency room. There, he, along with his parents, waited for nearly three hours before being triaged. When it was eventually discovered that the boy was seriously ill, he was airlifted to Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children, where he died shortly after being admitted.
A coroner’s inquest issued 23 recommendations aimed at improving emergency care. The hospital’s chief administrative officer was swarmed by reporters as he emerged from the courthouse where the recommendations had just been announced.
“The coroner’s inquest identified 23 things that you did wrong that contributed to the death of this five-year-old boy. What do you have to say about that?” a reporter acerbically shouted.
This was a critical moment; how the administrator responded to the question would set the tone of the subsequent media coverage and determine the impact of the crisis on the hospital’s reputation.
The administrator’s state of mind would be key in formulating his response. If the threatening tone of the question prompted fear, anger, or frustration, he might have instinctively avoided the issue and instead attacked the reporter.
Or, as was the actual case, he could ignore the reporter’s provocation and focus on the tragic death of an innocent child, thus enabling his genuine compassion to shape the content and tone of his answer.
Here’s what he said: “We are going to look carefully at every one of those recommendations, because if there is anything that we can do to prevent a tragedy like this from ever happening again, we are going to do it.”
This straightforward and candid response spoken with heart-felt conviction presented the hospital as sympathetic, concerned about the wellbeing of its patients, and willing to accept responsibility for its actions. And by so doing, the hospital administrator pre-empted what might otherwise have devolved into a lengthy and destructive controversy.
The news coverage that followed focused on the concerns raised by the coroner’s inquest rather than fixing blame. This approach also served the public good, leading to the establishment of more effective triage procedures.
But there’s a caveat: Without proper training, the instinct to deflect provocative questions by attacking the messenger or otherwise avoiding the issue will likely triumph over the preferred response of speaking honestly from both the heart and the mind.
While learning to fly airplanes years earlier, I was taught that a pilot’s instinctive reaction to such emergencies as an engine failure or flying into bad weather will usually result in disaster. Effective corrective action is often counterintuitive and must be learned.
This principle also holds true for crises. The most successful spokespersons undergo formal training to replace instinct with acquired skills that are applied confidently and without hesitation.