The case of Dr. Gianluca Fanelliinterventionist radiologist of the Umberto Parini hospital in Aosta, sparked a heated debate after the doctor used A hospital CT to diagnose and cure her Athena catseverely injured following a six -storey fall.
The episode, which took place on the evening of January 27, is now the subject of an investigation by the Prosecutor and a disciplinary procedure by the USL of the Aosta Valley. Athena, adopted by the street and part of a family with five other cats and three dogs, fell from a height of about 18 meters.
Visited by a vet, the diagnosis was severe: Rear fractures, possible pneumothorax and risk of internal damage. Faced with the gravity of the situation, Fanelli has decided to intervene personally. After ensuring that the hospital CTs were not in use and that there were no patients waiting, has carried out a quick radiological examination To check the state of pneumothorax. Later he performed a drainage to allow the cat to breathe again. Athena reacted positive for treatment, gradually recovering.
For the radiologist it was an act of love and responsibility
The story, however, raised a matter of principle: the use of public machinery for private purposes. The Healthcare Company immediately started internal investigationsinvolving the discipline commission, which will have to establish any sanctions. In addition, the reporting to the Prosecutor led to the opening of a file to verify the presence of prosecutable crimes.
Fanelli, aware of the possible consequences, said he was ready to compensate for any economic damagesbut he reiterated that he was not repentant of his gesture. For him, it was a Act of love and responsibilityalso motivated by the affection of his children for the animal. His wife, the senator of the League Nicoletta Spelgatti, publicly defended her choice, claiming that the doctor simply has Save a life Without taking away nobody.
The regional councilor for health, Carlo Marzi, underlined the need to clarify, ensuring transparency in the management of the case. In the meantime, the story has divided public opinion between those who praise the doctor for his altruistic gesture and those who underline the violation of the rules on the use of public health tools.
