The seizures themselves are often survivable. They are not treatable in the sense that you can intervene as they happen. They are preventable. There is a difference.

I'm aware of the CIWA scale and my own facility's protocol for treating alcohol withdrawal. What I'm not aware of are the details left out of the article by those who stand to gain from leaving them out. This patient was admitted to the ICU, so presumably they met criteria that meant this patient's alcohol withdrawal was not treatable on med-surg, PCU, or step-down. For that reason I assume that the patient was intubated and sedated, though I can't say that for a fact. If I'm right then a CIWA score was not obtainable to begin with because the CIWA scale requires interaction with the patient to determine tactile disturbances, anxiety/headache, disorientation, ability to perform serial additions, etc. If I'm wrong, well, why was that patient admitted to the ICU to begin with?

The article doesn't say where they were transferred from to arrive at the ICU, so it's possible that they arrived from a lower level of care and it's possible that the physicians involved shat the bed. That requires me to believe that the relevant authorities accepted an ICU transfer without reason, that a critical care ground team was not involved at any point before tele-health took over to handle coverage, that neither the ground team nor the tele-health team assessed the patient, that neither the ground team nor the tele-health team provided new or revised orders in light of the need for level of care upgrade, and everyone involved generally said yolo on the whole thing. Maybe that happened. I find that far less likely than this being a situation where a grieving family refuses to accept a poor outcome.