Deaths of 2 prisoners at Taycheedah occurred during uptick in flu cases
Shawnee Reed, 36, died Feb. 23, and Brittany Doescher, 33, died March 6, according to Beth Hardtke, an agency spokeswoman.
The women had been transported to an unnamed area hospital on Feb. 22 where they later died, Hardtke said.
Wisconsin Public Radio and Wisconsin Watch reported that family members of the two women said hospital staff linked their cause of death to pneumonia.
Fond du Lac County's chief medical examiner, Adam Covach, said the cause and manner of both deaths remain under investigation. DOC declined to comment on the circumstances surrounding their deaths, citing medical privacy laws.
The women's deaths come as DOC has taken steps to prevent the spread of respiratory illnesses inside the state's prisons, as Wisconsin experiences one of its worst flu seasons in the past decade.
Hardtke shared a memo from Taycheedah's warden, Michael Gierach, that said a unit there was placed under "modified operations" on Feb. 28 because of reported respiratory illnesses.
Changes included requiring unit staff and prisoners to wear masks, keeping prisoners in the unit and having prisoners eat meals in their cells. Hardtke confirmed the restrictions were lifted on March 6. DOC did not say if the women who died had been living on that unit.
Prisoners at Taycheedah also were not charged a co-pay to see a medical provider for respiratory symptoms between Feb. 28 and March 11, according to Hardtke. The co-pay was re-instated as cases declined at the prison.
Prisoners at different DOC institutions, including Taycheedah, also have recently been tested and received treatment for Influenza A, Hardtke said.
DOC did not immediately have numbers available for the total number of flu diagnoses across the state's prison system.
Hardtke confirmed that Reed and Doescher's deaths bring the total number of DOC in-custody deaths to 15 since the start of the year.
Fifty-five people died in the custody of Wisconsin's prison system in 2023 and 59 deaths were reported in 2024, according to records obtained by the Journal Sentinel.
The DOC does not notify the public when a prisoner dies in its custody, and families and advocates for prisoners have long criticized the agency for its lack of transparency when it comes to reporting in-custody deaths.
During the pandemic, the department published data about prisoners' deaths related to COVID-19, a decision that came after months of outcry from advocates and civil liberties organizations. It has since taken that data off its website.
Contact Vanessa Swales at 414-308-5881 or vswales@gannett.com. Follow her on X @Vanessa_Swales.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Deaths of 2 women at Taycheedah prison came amid rise in flu cases
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
2 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
The Clashing Advice Over COVID-19 Shots for Kids
Should you give your baby a COVID-19 shot? The answer isn't as straightforward or as much of a consensus as it used to be: In an unusual move, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is recommending a different approach to childhood vaccination than the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Both groups agree that families should make individual decisions in consultation with their doctors about whether kids should be vaccinated. But the AAP has a stricter stance for the youngest eligible children in the U.S., recommending that all of them get COVID-19 shots. The CDC stopped recommending COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children older than six months following guidance from the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in May. The CDC does, however, recommend the shot for children who are moderately or severely immunocompromised. A day after the AAP released its recommendations, Kennedy fired back at the organization on social media, accusing them of allowing pharmaceutical-company donors to guide their recommendations. AAP maintains that its recommendations are based on science. Here's what to know about the clashing advice regarding COVID-19 vaccines for kids. What does the AAP recommend in terms of COVID-19 shots for children? Whether most children should get a COVID-19 vaccine should be based on their particular risk, the AAP says—taking into account their underlying conditions, such as asthma, obesity, or diabetes, as well as whether they live in a household with people at high risk for developing severe disease. That risk is higher for the youngest eligible age group—ages 6 months to 23 months—which is why the AAP recommends that all kids in this age group get vaccinated. 'For the youngest kids, the hospitalization rate is similar to that for adults 50 to 64 years old,' says Dr. Sean O'Leary, chair of the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases. 'It's not nothing. And that's for something that can be prevented by a vaccine, which has been better studied than any medical product in our history. We have a very strong level of confidence in the safety of the vaccine.' HHS did not respond to TIME's request for comment. Why are the recommendations different? Generally, the CDC sets the schedule for which vaccines people should get and at which ages. The CDC makes its decision based on advice from its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). ACIP is made up of independent experts who volunteer to review data, discuss their findings, and make recommendations to help guide the CDC. But Kennedy—a longtime vaccine-skeptic who now oversees the CDC as head of HHS—fired all members of ACIP in June, accusing them of following industry interests. Kennedy replaced them days later with people he had selected, 'many of them with strong anti-vaccine views,' says O'Leary. Read More: How Having a Baby Is Changing Under Trump After ACIP was replaced, AAP—which typically works closely with the advisory committee and other liaison groups in setting vaccination schedules—decided not to attend ACIP's first meeting under the new administration in the spring. 'We saw from that meeting that ACIP has gone off the rails, essentially, in terms of the way they are operating and the messaging from the new members, which is very much around sowing distrust about vaccines and not making evidence-based vaccine recommendations,' says O'Leary. Weeks later, the AAP and other liaison groups were asked to discontinue their participation in ACIP work groups, O'Leary says. 'We received an email un-inviting us,' he says. The reason provided, he says, was that the organizations represented 'special interest groups,' which O'Leary says is a 'poor interpretation of the rules. All of the organizations at the table have expertise, and there are a lot of reasons to have representation from professional societies.' Which advice will doctors and pharmacists follow? O'Leary says pediatricians are anticipating having to have more conversations with families about the conflicting vaccine advice, and that the AAP is providing guidance to help inform those discussions on its website and via emails to its members. 'Politics has entered the exam room in a way that it never has before,' he says. 'These discussions will be contextual, depending on how well the pediatrician knows the family, what relationship they have, and how frank they can be with them in the discussion.' Ultimately, he says, the message from pediatricians should be this: 'We are committed to the health of children, and our recommendations are based on the best available science.' Read More: What the New COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance Means For You Pharmacists must take a slightly different approach, since they are only allowed to vaccinate according to the CDC's recommendations, while doctors can vaccinate outside of strictly approved conditions or populations in so-called 'off-label' use. Since current CDC recommendations say that families should make their own decisions about whether their children receive the shot, pharmacists will vaccinate kids if parents want them to have the shots, but won't specifically recommend that people get them. 'Our guidance is to always follow what the CDC or HHS recommends,' says Rick Gates, chief pharmacy officer at Walgreens. If families come in with questions about whether their child should get the COVID-19 shot, pharmacists will probably refer them back to their pediatrician or family physician. Will insurance cover COVID-19 vaccines for kids if the CDC doesn't recommend them? It's still not clear how insurers will respond to the differing recommendations. 'This is a real concern,' says Dr. David Higgins, an infectious-disease expert at AAP. Traditionally, a recommendation from ACIP means that a shot will be covered, since any vaccines recommended by the committee have to be reimbursed by insurers under the Affordable Care Act. It's not clear how insurers will interpret the individual choice of families when it comes to vaccinating children. The AAP is urging insurers to continue covering the COVID-19 vaccine for infants six to 23 months, despite the fact that ACIP does not recommend the vaccine for all kids in this age group. 'The AAP is already engaging with private insurers and policymakers to ensure our evidence-based recommendations are covered,' Higgins says, 'and we will continue to advocate to make vaccines accessible to every child in every community.'
Miami Herald
29 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
US Bankruptcies Hit Highest Level Since COVID
The U.S. saw a sharp increase in corporate bankruptcy filings in July, according to a recent report, reaching a post-COVID peak and placing 2025 on track to surpass last year's total. S&P Global Market Intelligence, the research and data arm of the credit-rating agency, found that filings by large public and private companies rose to 71 last month from 66 in June, marking the highest monthly tally since July 2020. So far in 2025, meanwhile, the total of 446 bankruptcy filings is the highest for this seven-month stretch since 2010. Experts told Newsweek that, when factoring in things like currency depreciation and corporate structures, statistics such as these are less alarming than they may initially appear. However, the notable increase in both business and personal bankruptcies in recent months has exacerbated existing concerns about the overall health of the U.S. economy. In its report, S&P Global cited the impact of high interest rates and "uncertainty" created by tariffs; but the economy is also grappling with elevated inflation, a precarious labor market and other headwinds that have prompted some economists to warn of an impending recession. Through the first seven months of the year, bankruptcies were heavily concentrated in the industrial and consumer discretionary sectors, totaling 70 and 61, respectively. Among high-profile bankruptcies, S&P Global noted three that had over $1 billion in assets and liabilities at the time of their July filings: Glucose-monitoring company LifeScan Global; canned goods company Del Monte Foods; and Genesis Healthcare, the Pennsylvania-headquartered nursing home and long-term care provider. With 446 bankruptcies recorded within the first seven months, 2025 is on track to surpass 2024's full-year total of 688. This compares to 634 in 2023, 373 in 2022, 405 in 2021 and 638 in 2020. For its tracking purposes, S&P Global defined "large" firms as public companies with at least $2 million in assets or liabilities, and private companies with at least $10 million at the time of the bankruptcy filings. However, Robert Lawless, a professor of law at the University of Illinois and co-author of Debt's Grip: Risk and Consumer Bankruptcy, said that this benchmark may result in comparisons that are not quite "apples-to-apples." "A dollar has lost 19 percent of its value since December 2020," he told Newsweek. "Similarly, a $2 million bankruptcy today is the same as approximately a $1.4 million bankruptcy in 2010." "Inflation over time will make it seem like there are more 'big' bankruptcies if an adjustment is not made," Lawless said. Newsweek has contacted S&P Global via email for clarification on its methodology. Lawless added that the report avoids a crucial issue by tracking bankruptcy filings rather than the number of entities filing for bankruptcy, as others have done recently. Earlier this month, bankruptcy information services platform Epiq AACER reported that commercial bankruptcy filings had jumped 78 percent year-over-year to 911 in July. However, as Lawless noted in a blog post, nearly a third of these filings were the result of the Genesis Healthcare bankruptcy. "The narrative focused on the number of entities filing for bankruptcy is not quite right," Melissa Jacoby, a law professor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, told Newsweek. "Many of those separate corporate entities are part of a common corporate group-companies partition themselves into separate business associations under state law, but they typically are an integrated whole in terms of thinking about a bankrupt business and are managed together in the bankruptcy process," she said. S&P Global, in the report, wrote: "Companies are contending with elevated interest rates as uncertainty from U.S. tariff policy pressures costs and supply chain resilience." "Companies could benefit from the [Federal Reserve] rate cut if such a move impacts U.S. Treasury yields or market sentiment," it said, adding that: "Treasury yields influence corporate debt interest rates more directly than the Fed rate." Moody's chief economist Mark Zandi, said earlier this month: "It's no mystery why the economy is struggling; blame increasing U.S. tariffs and highly restrictive immigration policy. The tariffs are cutting increasingly deeply into the profits of American companies and the purchasing power of American households." Despite rising bankruptcies, other signs point to resilience among large U.S. corporations. According to recent analysis by Goldman Sachs strategists, cited in Bloomberg, aggregate second-quarter earnings per share for S&P 500 companies are up 11 percent compared to last year, surpassing previous forecasts of a 4 percent gain. The Federal Reserve will make its next interest rate decision following the mid-September meeting. According to CME FedWatch, which predicts moves by the central bank based on interest rate trades, there is an 81 percent chance of a 25-basis points cut at this meeting. Related Articles Bed Bath & Beyond's 'Never Expire' Coupons to Be Accepted at New StoreMC Hammer Faces Financial Trouble After LawsuitClaire's Faces Stores Closing Across US As Retailer Files for BankruptcyAt Home Stores Closing: Full List of Locations 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Doctors renew push for free COVID shots for more Albertans, after coverage reinstated for health workers
Doctors are renewing their calls for the Alberta government to offer the COVID-19 vaccine for free to anyone who wants it, now that the province has agreed to cover health-care workers. In June, the province announced plans to charge most Albertans for the COVID shot this fall. But after weeks of pushback from doctors, scientists and health-care unions, it partially walked back its decision this week. On Tuesday, the Alberta government confirmed that health-care workers would be offered the COVID immunization, which is expected to cost more than $100 per shot, for free. "I'm hoping this is a sign that the government is re-evaluating its policy, in part because it is so out of step with the rest of the country," said Dr. James Talbot, a former chief medical officer of health in Alberta. Health experts, including Talbot, argue Alberta's COVID-19 vaccine policy makes it an outlier in Canada, noting it diverges from guidance provided by the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI). At a bare minimum, he said, the province should cover other groups that the NACI identifies as high-risk, including people who are pregnant, adults aged 65 and older, and people in or from First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities. But ideally, Alberta should offer the COVID-19 vaccine for free to anyone who wants it, Talbot said. "[Alberta should] return to the norm in Canada, which is that when you have a vaccine that prevents serious consequences, including death, that that vaccine is made available free of charge to people, so we don't create inequities in the system where the rich are covered and the poor are not," said Talbot, who is also an adjunct professor in the University of Alberta's school of public health. The NACI's guidelines also recommend that people who are not considered high-risk may be offered a COVID vaccine. The move would reduce ER visits, hospital admissions and other strains on the health system, including ongoing care for people who develop long COVID, said Talbot. When the province announced its new plans, it said the vaccine would be offered in stages and coverage would be limited to specific high-risk groups including Albertans living in care homes and group settings, those receiving home care, people on social programs such as AISH, and immunocompromised individuals. 'This is their moment' Chris Gallaway, executive director of Friends of Medicare, said now is the time for the Alberta government to offer universal coverage of the COVID vaccine after it reinstated coverage for health workers. "By taking this step, the government has admitted these vaccines are good, that they work [and] they keep people healthier. So they should expand it back to all Albertans.… This is their moment to do that," he said. "They should really ensure all Albertans can access this vaccine if they want it, and stop with the anti-vaccine rhetoric and stop with the political choice over the public health choice." Edmonton-based infectious disease specialist, Dr. Lynora Saxinger, is pleased the province has reversed course and will cover health-care workers. Her biggest concern now is that easy, free access to the COVID vaccine should be offered to seniors, most of whom are not covered under the current plan. "I'm hoping that there's still active discussions going on about the prior decisions, because things are evolving to look like it could potentially be a high-impact COVID season again. And we know that people who are two-dose vaccinated are not well protected right now and we already have pretty full hospitals," said Saxinger, who works at the University of Alberta Hospital. "For people over 65, there's clearly increased risk and I think it's not appropriate to not make it easy for them to access vaccines." Positivity rates are rising, she said, and the virus has evolved to make the most recent vaccine that most people would have received, less of a match. "I think there is a real risk of increased severity and also higher numbers of infection this fall and winter," said Saxinger. She also wants the province to clarify which immunocompromised Albertans will be eligible for free immunizations. It has yet to share that information The Alberta government did not answer specific questions from CBC News about whether it is considering expanding coverage. "The fall immunization plan is currently being finalized, and full details — including eligibility and any administrative fees — will be available soon," a spokesperson for Adriana LaGrange, Alberta's minister of primary and preventative health services, said via email. The province has estimated the COVID-19 vaccine could cost $110 per shot. It has said previously that $135 million worth of doses were never used and ended up discarded during the 2023-24 respiratory virus season, and that the policy change was designed to avoid vaccine waste.
