Again, there's a period of lucidity. She thought she was fine when in actuality, she was slowly losing oxygen to her brain.
By the time you feel the pain, it's usually too late to fix it.
By the time she got to the hospital, she was near death and they transfered her to New York solely to be closer to family.

sigh Ending the cycle right here.
Georgina:
Are we safe here?
Michael:
Does Albert read?

"Again, I'm not dogging her. She had her son and his friend there and I'll bet she was thinking looking after them. I miss her and I grieve for her family. But I wish someone would have been there who could have convinced her not to be so brave."
Okay. I certainly agree about that. Natasha's downfall was that she was the one who always took care of everyone else.
But even if she'd gone with the first ambulence, if they'd followed the same procedure, i.e. driven her first to the hospital, where they watched her for two hours until she showed the tell-tale symptoms of brain injury even though they had no means of treating her(!!!), then taken her by road to the hospital in Montreal, chances are it still would have been too late to save her.
If someone falls on their head, why take them to a hospital that doesn't have the wherewithal to treat traumatic head injuries? Why deny an emergency helicopter to an area where there's a ski resort at which people are learning to ski and do fall a lot? Sorry, but as a firm believer in a single-payer health care system, I still have to say that Quebec's version of it (unlike the rest of Canada's) really sucks and might well have been responsible for her death.

Cool. Now back to my original point. A third of the time that it took to make it to a hospital that could have helped her was spent waiting for Ms. Richardson to accept help. And, face it, we don't know what would have happened if she had gone with the first ambulance but you can't deny the possibility of it making a world of difference.
Again, I5b4'm not dogging her. She had her son and his friend there and I'll bet she was thinking looking after them. I miss her and I grieve for her family. But I wish someone would have been there who could have convinced her not to be so brave.
Georgina:
Are we safe here?
Michael:
Does Albert read?

Apologies. My bad. It was only four wasted hours, beginning at 3:15p.m. when the paramedics arrived at Mont Tremblant the second time to 7:15p.m. when they finally arrived at the hospital in Montreal. By which time it was too late to save her.

Where the hell did you get this part of your previous post: "before DRIVING her for another five wasted hours to the hospital in Montreal"
Again, check your math. Or stop making things up that seem to refute the facts that you KNOW.
Georgina:
Are we safe here?
Michael:
Does Albert read?

Timeline from Globe & Mail -
12:43PM: first 911 call from the resort
1PM: paramedics arrive
3PM: second 911 call for an ambulance
3:09: medics arrive; Natasha is reportedly conscious but showing signs of "instability"
3:39: medics load her by stretcher into the ambulance after tending to her for half an hour. [HALF AN HOUR???]
4:20: ambulance arrives at the small hospital in Ste-Agathe. This is not a 20 minute ride as originally reported. So why on earth would she be sent there if she is showing signs of neurological instb68ability.
6:15PM: Natasha is sent by ambulance to Sacre-Coeur in Montreal. [They kept her at a hospital that could do nothing for her for nearly two hours.]
7:15PM: Natasha arrives at Sacre-Coeur.
[Another report said that Mont Tremblant does have access to a helicopter but it's only used for fun trips to Montreal.]

Obviously, I don't sit around waiting for you to spout off your authority because I'm just getting around to revisiting this board.
I have no idea where you're getting this timeline, but it's wrong. She finb68ally was taken from the resort around 3, meaning she refused treatment for 2 hours. She was at the hospital in Montreal around 7.
So check your math, k?
Georgina:
Are we safe here?
Michael:
Does Albert read?

Lydib68a, do you just sit around and wait for me to post on this subject so you can deny the fact that even if she'd agreed to be taken to the hospital, the hospital they would have taken her to is the local onesans MRI, sans brain surgeon, sans everything?
According to the time-line, they kept her in the local hospital "under observation" for nearly two hours before DRIVING her for another five wasted hours to the hospital in Montreal that might have been able to save her life. I wasn't there; I didn't make this up. It's in the published report that's been posted on this board.

jltyler, do you just argue with me for the sake of arguing? We both know that getting treatment right away would have made a HUGE difference.
Oh, I forgot that it's like you were there. My bad.
Georgina:
Are we safe here?
Michael:
Does Albert read?

It would have saved her even though the paramedics would still have driven her first to the local hospital instead of to the hospital in Montreal where they had the facilities to treat her? I don't think so.

Accepting help in the first place would have saved her. No knock on her - I'd turn down treatment if I thought I was OK, too. Just one of those unfortunate and freaky situations.
Georgina:
Are we safe here?
Michael:
Does Albert read?

What is definitely known is that the local hospital she was driven to had no means of treating her (so why lose valuable time in taking her there?); that the Quebec ministry of health didn't think it was necessary or cost effective to purchase a med-vac, emergency helicopter for the Mont Tremblant area where mainly tourists were skiing or learning to ski; and that there was either no doctor at the ski resort or no doctor brave enough to perform an emergency procedure when Natasha first showed signs of a life-threatening brain injury.
The only reasons one might think there was no hope from the outset was because of everything I said in the previous paragraph.