For those of you who feel I am biased regarding Wags: Ha! I say to you.
When Jane Mendoza adopted Wally from an animal shelter six years ago, she knew the dog had special needs.
The 9-pound, 9-ounce Chihuahua mix had brain damage, skeletal issues and poor social skills. But it wasn’t until a few years later that Mendoza discovered Wally’s most troubling health issue — recurring seizures. To combat the episodes, her veterinarian prescribed an anti-seizure medicine usually given to humans, phenobarbital. It worked wonders.
For the past four years, Mendoza religiously refilled the prescription at a Walgreens in Portage Park, then fed Wally two 15-milligram tablets every day. When the pharmacist handed her a new bottle of pills in early June, Mendoza recognized immediately that something was different. “I noticed the pills were bigger than usual but was told at the pharmacy that they were using a new provider,” Mendoza said. Trusting the pharmacist, she fed Wally the pills, starting June 8.
In the days that followed, the dog grew sick and weak. He became so lethargic he would fall and was unable to get back up. After one week, Wally spent most of his time unconscious.
“One morning his breathing was so shallow and he was so limp, I thought he was dying,” Mendoza said. Desperate for answers, she compared the number engraved on the pills to the number on the bottle’s label. They didn’t match.
Mendoza took the pills back to Walgreens, where a pharmacist found that the label was correct but the pills weren’t. Instead of 15-milligram tablets, the bottle contained 60-milligram tablets. She had been giving Wally four times the phenobarbital he was supposed to receive.
Mendoza took the dog to the vet, who helped nurse him back to health.
On June 16, Mendoza called Walgreens to complain about the pill mix-up. She was given a claim number and told to contact Sedgwick CMS, Walgreens’ insurance company. Afterward, Mendoza said she called Sedgwick CMS and Walgreens repeatedly and faxed copies of veterinary bills totaling $1,335.24, but encountered cold indifference.
Mendoza said it took repeated calls in which she “made such a stink and such an ass out of myself to anybody and everybody” before someone from Sedgwick CMS called her Aug. 3 and agreed to pay the vet bills. But almost a week later, Mendoza still hadn’t seen any documentation from Sedgwick CMS or Walgreens, and she feared she would not get her money.
“This is a problem that is 100 percent Walgreens’ fault,” she said in her email to What’s Your Problem? “They almost killed my little dog.” Mendoza said Wally was likely mistreated by his previous owner and isn’t going to win any dog shows but she loves him. “He’s just a special-needs dog,” she said. “He’s not a perfect little dog, but that doesn’t mean I want him to die from an overdose of phenobarbital. He deserves to have a happy life, like any other dog.”
The Problem Solver called Walgreens spokesman Robert Elfinger on Monday afternoon. By then, Sedgwick CMS had already sent Mendoza a “release of all claims and hold harmless agreement” which she was to sign, notarize and return in order to receive her $1,335.24.
“Cases like this are rare, but when they do occur, our priority is the patient’s health and well being,” Elfinger said in an email. “In Ms. Mendoza’s situation, we’re glad that Wally is OK and have agreed to refund her for the medicine and the veterinarian bills she incurred.”
Elfinger said the mix-up has served as an educational tool for Walgreens’ pharmacists. “We’re sorry this occurred and we apologized to Ms. Mendoza,” he said. “We have a multistep prescription filling process with numerous safety checks in each step to reduce the chance of human error. Since this incident, we have re-emphasized these procedures with our pharmacy staff.”
The hold-harmless agreement arrived in Mendoza’s mailbox on Thursday, but she wasn’t happy with it. She said the agreement was unacceptable because in it, Walgreens fails to take responsibility for its mistake. She was also not happy that the agreement included a gag clause.
“They can pay me or not pay me but I’m not shutting up,” she said. “I don’t like the part about a ‘doubtful and disputed’ claim. It’s not. It was 100 percent their fault.”
The Problem Solver called Elfinger on Thursday afternoon and told him of Mendoza’s concerns. Elfinger said Friday that Walgreens will pay Mendoza the $1,335.24 even if she does not sign the agreement. Walgreens also agreed to make $5,000 donation to A.D.O.P.T. pet shelter in Naperville in Wally’s honor, with the money earmarked toward helping the shelter prepare special-needs dogs for adoption.
“I’m really very happy about this,” Mendoza said. “I think they should feel good too. It takes away my desire to say mean things about Walgreens.”
Chicago Tribune, August 14, 2011, The Problem Solver
Driving by a Wags (Steeplerun), PITA and I decided to stop in “just in case.” Well, they had a bunch of lonely boxes of Estroven just sitting there, so I decided to take them home using the two-pocket with prong folders (6/$1 in-ad) as fillers.
