- Joined
- Apr 22, 2007
- Messages
- 22,322
- Reaction score
- 8,966
One of the jurors, Farid Khairzada, said that “there was not much defense, because everything was on tape.” He said that the man’s attorneys asked for $1.75 million and that the $500,000 award was a compromise between one juror who thought the man deserved nothing and at least one who thought he deserved more.
“We finally came to a conclusion,” Khairzada said, “that we have to give him something, just to make sure that this doesn’t happen again.”
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...on-leads-to-patient-suing-anesthesia.1067352/
Read this thread and the predictions that the case would settle out of court for $100k. Instead, the case went to trial and Ingham lost her job.
It's going to settle out of court.
And it will soon be completely forgotten .
Except for on this forum.
Where it has been memorialized.
And where some yokel will resurrect it two or more years from now trying to make some point or other.
I almost guarantee that.
Just browsed through a lot of the comments on the WaPo article. The vast majority (especially the ones with the most "likes") absolutely devastate the physicians. No mercy for the physicians. Saying stuff along the lines of, it serves them right, good they were taught a lesson, these physicians are incompetent, etc. The irony is I bet if someone recorded most of these commenters at their various jobs, then they'd also be caught talking sh** or whatever about a customer. But does rude talk mean they're incompetent at their jobs? Not necessarily. Yet the general public has no problem trashing physicians. It's a double standard.
I'm not at all saying these physicians weren't douchebags. They definitely are. Rather, what I'm saying is their punishment doesn't fit the crime. It seems out of proportion. It seems overly harsh.
I basically posted this exact comment on allo. You beat me by 3 hours. Jury system for medical torts is asinine.Not condoning the behavior on an ethical level, but, uhh... that's not how the jury system is meant to work.
Yes, because it's not a jury of peers. I know it sounds elitist, but one cannot be my "peer" until one has walked in my shoes. That's exactly the idea behind medical courts in most countries.Jury system for medical torts is asinine.
The GI guy was the one that falsified records and instructed the tech to lie to the patient and he was dropped from the suit on the first day. Suing the anesthesiologist for a diagnosis someone else puts in the chart is lunacy.
Where is the 200k worth of malpractice on the part of the anesthesiologist?
You can bet on it. This is where being in a two-party state will matter a lot.2nd Edit:
I also fear the flood gate this may open. Now EVERYONE is gonna try to record stuff in the OR and try to get paid.
This is not only about work. If you are a physician, anybody anywhere can record you and hold it against your "professionalism". Even summarily judge you and lynch your career, in the kangaroo court of public opinion. You are just a greedy bastard, and you deserve everything bad happening to you. That is the lesson.I've decided to never speak again at work. Mute, son.
I don't see how this is slander if it is between 2 doctors and a nurse that knows they are full of $hit. I bet they used to do the same with every other case. It should have been a misconduct case handled by the board. If we were going to sew for every time someone talks $hit behind our backs we would all be millionaires.
I have to admit that I have witnessed this kind of behavior over and over.
I don't understand this verdict and neither do many (any?) of the people that commented.
The GI guy was the one that falsified records and instructed the tech to lie to the patient and he was dropped from the suit on the first day. Suing the anesthesiologist for a diagnosis someone else puts in the chart is lunacy.
Where is the 200k worth of malpractice on the part of the anesthesiologist?
I bet he is still working there as $$ talks, loudly.
It's also amusing that if she just called him a limp dick pillow biter instead of "defaming" him in front of the non physician technician and/or nurse with STD diagnoses they may not have had a case against her at all and they wouldn't have dropped the GI guy.
Stupid Physicians and a stupid jury.
This goes to show how f-ed up the entire medical tort system is. And also why military service should be compulsory for everybody (people would toughen up a bit, and stop blowing things out of proportion).
What's next? Infliction of emotional distress because a fly bit the patient while he was in the hospital?
I am not condoning the behavior either. But this is something that should have been handled by the Medical Board, not a court. The patient can go home and spend his money feeling happy that he made medicine even more expensive for 300M Americans. He will always be in our thoughts and prayers.
It sounded like from the article that the anesthesiologist recorded the history of hemorrhoids on her preanesthetic evaluation?
I, too, am bothered by the juror's comments. I don't see how recording a history of hemorrhoids where none exist is $200K worth of malpractice damage. $200K worth of unethical behavior, maybe, but I doubt the medical consequences were any $, much less $200K.
Also, I agree with those doubting the patient's motivation to record post-op instructions and forgot to turn it on. He was either A) paranoid that something like that would happen, B) hoping something like that would happen with the intent to profit off it, or C) maybe even tipped off that that kind of stuff was happening at that office and was anticipating it happening?
Anesthesiologists wouldn't be putting the results of a scope in the patients chart.
And it sounds like Winged Scapula would have made a useful expert witness.
Almost everything can be a legal matter. The average person breaks a law at least once a week, unknowingly. That does not mean that we should make everything into a legal case. It's just not OK, for any society.I may agree that the amount might have been too high, but I certainly agree with the decision to deal with it in court, as it is a legal matter.
As far as I have read the article, there should have been no malpractice because there was no physical damage to the patient, except to his ego. According to your logic, a doctor who tells a patient she's ugly and fat, even in private, is guilty of medical negligence and malpractice, and the patient should sue for punitive damages.In Virginia, the law defines medical malpractice as anytime a healthcare professional commits medical negligence. "Negligence" here does not take the same definition as it does in other types of cases. Here, medical negligence is simply anytime the provider breaches the standard of care. The standard of care is defined as the generally accepted practice by other professionals in the region. As this was a clear breach of the standard of care, the doctor committed medical negligence, which means there was malpractice, which is a legal matter in addition to being an ethical matter.
According to your view, a doctor who tells who tells a patient she's ugly and fat, even in private, is guilty of medical negligence and malpractice, and the patient should sue for punitive damages.
While I'm not defending the actions of the physicians here,I call BS on the idea that the patient "turned on his phone [before the procedure] so he could capture the post-scope instructions." Patients don't do that unless they're paranoid or have reason to be.
1 Know a lawyer really well, talked to him about this. Defamation, by its legal definition, happens every single time somebody says something about another to a third party that is not true, whether it is good or bad. The main reasons people don't sue for this every time is because 1)they didn't know it happened and/or 2)they can't prove it happened. Here, there was a recording. It's slightly different if the victim is a public figure-in that case it has to be proven that the allegedly-slandering party had malicious intent. But with average joes, talking crap behind anybody's back is legally defamation and you can be sued for it if they find out about it and can prove it.
2 In Virginia, the law defines medical malpractice as anytime a healthcare professional commits medical negligence. "Negligence" here does not take the same definition as it does in other types of cases. Here, medical negligence is simply anytime the provider breaches the standard of care. The standard of care is defined as the generally accepted practice by other professionals in the region. As this was a clear breach of the standard of care, the doctor committed medical negligence, which means there was malpractice, which is a legal matter in addition to being an ethical matter. I don't want to sound like I'm vehemently disagreeing with you, because I'm not. I'm just relaying what the lawyer told me. I may agree that the amount might have been too high, but I certainly agree with the decision to deal with it in court, as it is a legal matter. The physicians should know the basics of medical malpractice laws in their states imho.
punitive damages are not usually covered by insurance. The anesthesiologist will most likely be writing a personal check.
Since hemorrhoids are NORMAL cushions of tissue that we ALL have, I'm not sure how writing it on the scope report is malpractice.
According to my understanding from my discussion with the lawyer, it's not malpractice because she put hemorrhoids per se, but because she violated the Virginia "standard of care" which is defined as the commonly accepted practice. So, the question becomes not "Did the patient have or not have hemorrhoids?", but "Is the commonly accepted practice in the region amongst doctors to write hemorrhoids on the chart in an instance such as this one?" And if the answer is no, it is malpractice.
Almost everything can be a legal matter. The average person breaks a law at least once a week, unknowingly. That does not mean that we should make everything into a legal case. It's just not OK, for any society.
This is true. But, if somebody is going to act on a legal issue, I prefer they actually do it in the courts, as that is the only appropriate venue for such things. So, do I think the patient should have sued? Well I probably wouldn't have. But, since the patient did decide to take action, I think he/she picked the appropriate venue in which to do it, since it is a legal matter.
As far as I have read the article, there should have been no malpractice because there was no physical damage to the patient, except to his ego. According to your logic, a doctor who tells a patient she's ugly and fat, even in private, is guilty of medical negligence and malpractice, and the patient should sue for punitive damages.
1 How come a different set of rules apply for a public figure? That's messed up.
2 Let's say this were a morbidly obese patient that you had to position on a Jackson table. The standard of care is off on that one. I have not seen one yet where people in the room manage to keep a straight face or not curse the gods. What's up with the double standard?
Don't hold your breath.As far as the Jackson table thing, in a case like that, if being vocally frustrated like that is commonplace as you say, then one could argue that the standard of care has not been breached. The defense could bring doctor after doctor up on the witness stand and get them to testify that they often vocally express frustration in similar fashion when confronted with a situation like that.
The rules are different because if there was an easy/low bar for public figures (particularly politicians) to successfully sue people for saying things that aren't perfectly factually true about them, even if out of ignorance, or in idle chitchat, or as hyperbole, or as a rhetorical device during a discussion about that public figure, it would have a stifling effect on free speech as it pertains to elections and public discussions of matters that impact the community.1 How come a different set of rules apply for a public figure? That's messed up.
According to my understanding from my discussion with the lawyer, it's not malpractice because she put hemorrhoids per se, but because she violated the Virginia "standard of care" which is defined as the commonly accepted practice. So, the question becomes not "Did the patient have or not have hemorrhoids?", but "Is the commonly accepted practice in the region amongst doctors to write hemorrhoids on the chart in an instance such as this one?" And if the answer is no, it is malpractice.
Was this a malpractice attorney you spoke with? The mere presence of doing something which may not be "commonly accepted" practice does not denote malpractice.
First, it is likely that there is no "standard of care" when it comes to denoting the presence of normal hemorrhoids found during a colonoscopy. Everyone will do it differently: some only note abnormal findings, others will note normal and abnormal.
But most importantly for it to be malpractice you must demonstrate that there was some harm to a patient. The notation that a patient possesses normal anatomy (e.g. hemorrhoids) is no different than stating he has 2 arms, or 2 legs, etc. This is an observation which is factually correct and does not harm the patient.
It is clear that patients do object to documentation of objective findings ("obese", "continues to smoke", "below normal IQ") but they must demonstrate harm or injury for malpractice to occur. They might not like it but its not malpractice to state that a patient is medically obese or possesses normal anatomy like hemorrhoidal cushions.
I didn't mean to imply that we were arguing or that you disagreed with me. And I don't mean to malign what is probably a family member, but there's a difference between a litigator and a litigator that does a lot of medical malpractice. Believe me, if and when you ever are sued for malpractice, you hope the plaintiff hires someone who doesn't litigate malpractice because there is a difference. But that's off topic...Yes it was. Well, a litigator at least. And he/she did have more to say as far as the defamation was concerned than the malpractice portion. I'm not disagreeing with you, WingedScapula. I don't know enough to warrant disagreeing with you. And I would find it hard to believe that an accomplished physician like you does not know the ins and outs of malpractice. But you and the lawyer I spoke with would probably be in disagreement when it comes to what constitutes malpractice in VA.
The rules are different because if there was an easy/low bar for public figures (particularly politicians) to successfully sue people for saying things that aren't perfectly factually true about them, even if out of ignorance, or in idle chitchat, or as hyperbole, or as a rhetorical device during a discussion about that public figure, it would have a stifling effect on free speech as it pertains to elections and public discussions of matters that impact the community.
They choose a life in the public eye, so the courts have taken the position that they need slightly thicker skin. That's all.
I didn't mean to imply that we were arguing or that you disagreed with me. And I don't mean to malign what is probably a family member, but there's a difference between a litigator and a litigator that does a lot of medical malpractice. Believe me, if and when you ever are sued for malpractice, you hope the plaintiff hires someone who doesn't litigate malpractice because there is a difference. But that's off topic...
Unfortunately I have some experience with medical malpractice litigation, and if Virginia wants to define negligence = malpractice that's fine, but as I (added above after you replied), they still have to prove damages and/or injury. Virginia State law requires that the health care provider failed to provide care in accordance with “the degree of skill and diligence practiced by a reasonably prudent practitioner in the field of practice or specialty in this Commonwealth” and that the health care provider’s negligence was the cause of the plaintiff's damages.
Thus the documentation of the presence of hemorrhoids does not cause damage and is probably one of the reasons the gastroenterologist was dropped from the suit.
I'm still not sure what the injury was that resulted in the anesthesiologist being sued.
Since its not a primary source document, its possible that it wasn't for malpractice but rather for defamation (which I can't speak about). It wouldn't the first time the news media has gotten it wrong.If injury is in fact required for malpractice, then I don't know why malpractice was in the picture either. Maybe there is something we don't know from the article that will come out eventually. Or maybe they were just sued on defamation and not malpractice? I can't remember if the article specifies or not. Or maybe the whole thing is a load of fecal matter, pun intended, and it will get overturned on appeal.
http://www.medschool.lsuhsc.edu/faculty/docs/CV-Tiffany Ingham 2.pdf
She is a Major in the USAF reserves. I believe she may be working in Florida now as she is no longer practicing in VIrginia.