Reviews for Love on the Third Floor
acchikocchi chapter 4 . 10/30/2012
Just finished reading chapter three and there's one more thing that irks me:
Why would the paramedics waste transportation space on a woman who only had a an injured arm? She would have been treated on the spot, not carried to the hospital when there were still more urgent cases to be taken care of.
And any rescue helper at the scene would have jumped at the notice that there might still be a small child in one of the buses. Because of the possibility of fire the vehicles would have to be completely cleared anyway, so someone would have been bound to notice the child, especially if it was making so much noise.

The whole head wound thing could be easily fixed if you just changed it to a wound in the lower abdomen, that's messier and there's greater risk of infection but it would be more probable for the patient to survive that one; with deep head wounds that's always highly unlikely.

And the child incident could be patched up by making it a search in the overcrowded hospital instead of a rescue mission where Dr. Wrath violates hospital policies and police protocol.

acchikocchi chapter 3 . 10/30/2012
Uhm okay, right now I just feel the need to say:
What. The. Fuck.

In chapter two I still thought,
whatever, so she doesn't care that nobody has to run around fetching doctors in a hospital (medical personnel on duty is required to carry some sort of beeper, so they can be immediately contacted in case of an emergency, it's a waste of resources to send other poeple) and she didn't establish any hierarchy among the doctors working on the patient (usually, whoever is the highest ranking one currently on ER duty when a new case arrives gets to call the shots), just assuming that the readers would recognize Dr. Wrath as the one with the most authority because he yelled the loudest. – Which by the way is the epitome of unprofessional. The nurses and doctors already present in the room are supposed to be trained ER personnel, yet you portrayed them as a bunch of paniced idiots who were just making lots of noise without actually helping the patient AND they were unable to inform the arriving doctor in charge of the patients basic information and vitals, instead handing him a rather useless file and saying, "You need to see this for yourself."
That's something I'd maybe expect to hear on Grey's Anatomy but no professional would just step back from an operating table to let someone take their time to asses a situation that has already been acutely life-threatening for several minutes.
ER's are messy and hectic, but they are efficient; one person has to be in charge from the very beginning and assingn everyone to a specific job, so they know what to focus on.

Furthermore, if a patient has a large object imbedded into their head, but the CT shows that there is neither bleeding nor blood clots forming (which is a problem of its own as metal absorbs x-rays so it's hard to get a good look at the area), it's common sense to just leave it in for now, and to try to stabilize the patients vitals first. Because removing the object would only be benificial if it was currently making the situation worse. If it isn't acutely endagering the patients life, you leave it in, and try to make a real plan to remove it with lots of preparation taking all possibilities into account.
If the patient's brain pressure were to become life-endangering, trepanation would still be a better and less risky solution.

And most importantly: You don't give anesthetics to someone you intend to perform brain surgery on.
Usually people only get a small injection to numb the skin on their heads because your brain doesn't actually have pain receptors. And if you can't tell how much damage a brain injury has caused, it is crucial to get the patient to wake up and then keep him awake, because it is the only way to tell if you're hurting some more crucial parts of his brain in the process.
Although, if he suddenly woke up and started thrashig around that would be a problem, so he should have been fixated to the table.

I was totally ready to ignore all of that though, because really, that's just minor details that you could even partly disagree on without being wrong.

But then came that passage in chapter three:
"I grabbed a knife and sliced the back of his head open in one fluid movement. The blood began pouring out the second I made the cut. I dug my hands in his skull and found the damaged artery."

Firstly, to open someones head, you wold need a saw. And for that, the person's head has to be held absolutely still, so cutting a skull open is not a spur-of-the-moment thing.
Secondly, it is common knowledge that head wounds bleed heavily. Why would a surgeon open another cut on a patient that was already on the verge of bleeding to death?
Thirdly, hands cannot penetrate a skull. That of a newborn, sure, their bones are still sort of soft, but not an 18 year-old's.
And that's that.

I'm sorry if some of what I wrote came off as harsh or mean but I am just kind of annoyed right now. I just needed to vent so I can now return to reading without any bitter feelings left.

If you don't want to research something don't write in detail about it. It just makes the story less believable and lowers its general appeal.