Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
It also depends if someone turns it into the board. Boards are busy, they want slam dunk cases
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
Resident being sued
Started by meow1985
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
My boards don't give that much specific info to the public in their disciplines
The state license would be revoked not the degree. And yes it happens
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
One of the first things you learn in law school is to never represent yourself. If someone from a top school is doing it, they were never top school material.
Yeah, every time we heard that the patient refused to meet with the public defender and were going to represent themselves I would stop working on the d/c summary because they were pretty much guaranteed to not be going anywhere that day.
but why would u be working on the dc summary if you were probating someone? Does the court rule against you often?
You always complete the DC summary because you never know how a judge will rule and if they say the patient should be released, it's an immediate thing. Judges sometimes surprise you.
Back in residency, the judge never made the decision right then at the hearing. It always took a few days for the judge to review things, but that wasn't the case other places I've worked.
I was just hypothesizing that a personality disordered and highly intelligent individual (maybe who is pissed that they got IMed) with good training in law or medicine might at least be be able to throw up some road blocks and/or at least make an argument as to why there was malpractice. Not saying that it wouldn't be at terrible idea and that I as the defendant wouldn't be thrilled...
... but a guy with NPD and a degree from HLS representing himself would scare me a little more than what this is most likely: a very sad
and unfortunate case of a psychotic person who thinks they were abused by the system, is trying to exact revenge and is just barely organized enough to do so. I wouldn't lose a second of sleep over that.
(Also, another aside, while you may have been advised against discussing the specifics of this case, and I don't think you should do this here, I don't see how discussing a similar, yet clearly hypothetical and slightly different in some facts could ever come back to bite you).
Maybe it is not possible in all EMRs but I always did my best to have a running draft discharge summary going throughout the whole hospitalization, making finalizing it on day of discharge far less burdensome. It also helped me maintain perspective on the course of hospitalization and at a glance I could know exactly what we had tried when already.
Thx for the update. The lawyer stuff is still relevant in most cases. You just haven't been bitten by one.
Did you disclose your mental health struggles in your application?
I've had extensive discussions with lawyers, my treating physicians, and my PD about whether I should disclose my MH issues, and they said that they do not rise to the level of needing to be disclosed.
Last edited:
You've dealt with the legal system in the past?
Is this you? You post on your own threads with different accts?
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
People in my family have had legal entanglements, also personal property and custody stuff.
You asked me to look at the postings in the other acct but limit the people who can look..
Yeah, I posted that with the wrong account by mistake. That's me. Didn't mean to mislead anyone. And what I said there is true. One of my co-residents got named in a suit from her PGY1 as well. A different suit from mine. She had no issue getting jobs and a fellowship, but she is not planning to move out of state. Her suit is still pending too.
And here's my MH disclose or don't disclose thread. I deleted a lot of it, but the important update is down the page with the take home point from my lawyers and treating physician.
Licensing and mental health
. Got my question answered, thanks. See last post for takeaways.
forums.studentdoctor.net
Licensing and mental health
. Got my question answered, thanks. See last post for takeaways.
forums.studentdoctor.net
Last edited:
The illness affected you enough to have to take time off from your job, which is highly relevant. Garden variety or not, that's a big deal.
Does the hospital you're applying to know this? Did you answer their questions honestly?
The answer to the question asked by the licensing board is no.
But I can disclose it if you, an internet commenter, think that my doctor, my PD, the person I talked to at the state board, and my lawyer are wrong. I don't care at this point.
Last edited:
The hospital never asked about mental illness or time off.
Much like in other things, the board is different from when people used to sit on it.
I know the past prosecutor for our board and he can't believe how different the board is now.
If you think I will have a problem, *help* me. Don't just feed my worst case scenario fears.
Also, jobs are not *allowed* to ask about illness. They ask if you fall into a disability class based on anything, and I do not.
Last edited:
Things are different when you are a physician when it comes to these questions.
I can't predict the future for you, but it's better to tell the truth, imo.
A month off is a big deal.
Is it any more relevant than having given birth or having gotten any non-mental illness that caused them to take time off? Would you say the same if they had MS? Cancer? Inflammatory bowel disease?
I know plenty of excellent doctors at top programs who have taken way more than a month off for illness, including mental, and continue to get promoted, including above their peers.
Yeah, but the answer to the question asked by the state still technically and truthfully "No."
The condition does not make it impossible to do a decent job taking care of patients. The condition just makes me abjectly miserable and makes me spend hours of my free time online looking for info and opinions to dissuade me from my worries. Time I could spend doing things with my family and friends and taking care of myself.
Last edited:
The illness since it effects facets of your life so deeply is the definition of impairment.
You are free to do as you wish.
But better to ask permission than forgiveness when it comes to Medical boards imo
They don't care about other facets of my life. They care about medicine.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
You took a month off medicine
It's relevant to the state board.
One of my co residents had a bad bike accident and was out of work for a month?
Countless people go on maternity/paternity leave?
Physicians, residents included, are allowed to be ill and to have lives. They also are entitled to on average 12 weeks a year of *paid* medical leave, no questions asked.
Also, I promise you, no job I applied about specific health conditions, just if I meet criteria for a disability based on a long list of Dx's none of which are mine.
Last edited:
Do we know if it was disclosed to the board?
I have no idea but I doubt it. My board doesn't ask questions about illnesses, only actions against you by hospitals and other boards.
Having an illness per se is not considered misconduct in my state, you have to practice while impaired by that (physical or mental) illness. Taking time off for any number of months, even if you became impaired during your break, would not be misconduct.
With that said ... You could either trust your doctor and lawyer or random internet people on this one...
If not trolling what do you anticipate gaining from this thread?
What just happened in this thread is pretty frustrating and imo, factually wrong on multiple accounts. First and foremost, the definition of impairment on the job because it doesn't mean what you think it means. Secondly, out of nowhere you ask the OP about his/her mental health history when there's a whole other thread devoted to it, thereby muddying the line between the two threads which are about two separate questions. Third, anyone who read the other thread knows the OP was struggling deeply with this decision and had finally come to a conclusion after consulting an attorney AND the doctor in question. The OP was so over the discussion that he/she even deleted his/her posts in the thread because the question had been answered and the decision had been made. To then bring that same discussion to another, unrelated thread is inappropriate, imo. What was the purpose of that, besides further poking at the OP (even unintentionally) and resurrecting the struggle all over again for him/her?
Last edited:
Why would I be trolling. **** happens to people.
The goal of this thread was to get support.
Then it turned into a question of whether the case I just got served with will affect my chances of getting a license and credentialing.
Last edited:
Minor correction, FMLA does mean you can get 12 weeks off in situations involving your health, caring for a loved one, new child etc. but your employer is under no obligation to pay you for that time. They only have to give you your job back at the end of 12 weeks.
Do your best to ignore TikiTorches's contribution to your MH question. It has nothing to do with this thread and with this question and I'd hate to think it only served to make you further question a decision that had been made with all the Ts crossed and all the Is dotted. You consulted an attorney. You consulted the physician who made the diagnosis. You did your due diligence and reached a decision that 99% of us all agreed with on your other thread. Don't allow it being brought up in this totally unrelated context to trigger another round of self-doubt and questions.
Just a patent, but also a lawyer - a "pro se" plaintiff bringing a claim is a "tell" as to the case's merits -- if that claim had any merit, or even if it didn't ultimately have merit but was somehow plausible on its face such that it could be used to extract a significant settlement, a real lawyer would have taken the case. That the plaintiff couldn't get a lawyer speaks volumes. I completely understand how stressful it is to have been named, but in my very much lay person's opinion, OP's thought process as displayed in this thread suggests an urgent need for some serious therapy. A lot of "what if, but no, really, what if???" that is not reality-based. Lawyers have licenses too, and we get sued for malpractice, that is what insurance is for. I have colleagues who have been sued, the cases eventually settled, they are partners in major law firms and never once considered giving up their licenses and leaving the industry because they were named as defendants!
At the end of the day, OP, just consider that stat about half of all physicians bring sued in their career. Now consider that the vast majority of physicians are gainfully employed. This is really all you need to know.
people keep saying half are sued in their career..considering it’s generally around a 30 year career damn that seems like an underestimation
They aren't randomly distributed across the entire population of physicians, which is why when people infer from a yearly rate to "well after X number of years on average all physicians will be sued" you can go ahead and stop listening.
In general, yes. But in my residency and the jobs I applied for it is paid at 100% for 12 weeks, and a fraction of that thereafter.
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Haha, I am in therapy. And it does help me function.
Last edited:
1 in 3 physicians has been sued; by age 55, 1 in 2 hit with suit
Specialty, age and gender tied to liability risk, says new research. Reforms are needed to fix the liability system that imposes high burdens on U.S. health care.
www.ama-assn.org
This AMA article suggests a cross sectional study design, and says by 55 half of physicians are sued. But by 40, only 8% are. And only 16% if psychiatrists get sued.
Last edited:
1 in 3 physicians has been sued; by age 55, 1 in 2 hit with suit
Specialty, age and gender tied to liability risk, says new research. Reforms are needed to fix the liability system that imposes high burdens on U.S. health care.
This AMA article suggests a cross sectional study design, and says by 55 half of physicians are sued. But by 40, only 8% are. And only 16% if psychiatrists get sued. I’m also female (funny that all of you though I was male), so that makes me even less likely to be sued. I guess as a young female psychiatrist I am “lucky” that way.
Hopefully though boards don’t aren’t so granular in their approach that they’d be like, hmmm, she got sued in a low litigation specialty her first year in this career, must be a rotten doctor. That’s some tinfoil hat thinking going on there.
The more important point is that they will think "huh, pending pro se lawsuit, that's totally irrelevant to our decision making."
Ok, update:
I talked to an acquaintance who is a neurosurgeon in my destination state. She is the neighbor of a family member. She is another voice who indicated that between my MH related LOA and pending lawsuit, the board and the credentialing body are unlikely to be concerned about me. In fact, her knee-jerk reaction as a non-psychiatrist to my description of what led to my leave was, "oh, so you were burned out."
A good takeaway message for posterity that she happened to express is that the board just wants to know that I am safe to practice.
I talked to an acquaintance who is a neurosurgeon in my destination state. She is the neighbor of a family member. She is another voice who indicated that between my MH related LOA and pending lawsuit, the board and the credentialing body are unlikely to be concerned about me. In fact, her knee-jerk reaction as a non-psychiatrist to my description of what led to my leave was, "oh, so you were burned out."
A good takeaway message for posterity that she happened to express is that the board just wants to know that I am safe to practice.
Last edited:
I don't think what you described for the reason for your leave was burnout. Burnout is kind of a catch-all phrase that everyone uses but few use it correctly. Your friend was wrong, based on what you've told us. But that's not really relevant because the overall point is right -- the board is unlikely to be concerned about you.
