Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The jury and the judge disagree with you. Read the article
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359
In some situations, being an ahole is malpractice. This doctor committed the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation through her treatment of this patient.
There are relationships and than there are relationships in life. The relationship between a physician and a patient is an extremely close an important one. When we present ourselves for a colonoscopy we are exposed in those intimate way to the gastroenterologist and the anesthesiologist. We pay a great deal for these procedures and there are certain reasonable expectations. Any sane would say that those expectations include not having the doctor joke about your having syphilis (especially when you don't), suggesting that your penis shouldn't be touched because of the syphilis infection, suggesting you should be punched in the face "to man you up". I saw another article where it was claimed she said someone should fire a gun up the patient's rectum. Although, I didn't hear that on the audio tape that has been made available. She suggested she would falsify a medical record claiming the patient had hemmroids when he did not. Interestingly, I hear the gastroenterologist kind of encouraging these comments and an MA present for the surgery laughing in the background. Its a most disturbing scene.
The real injury to the patient (and to others) was the violation of trust that occurred. Can we trust a doctor who would act like this to properly sedate us? Can we trust her to monitor our vital signs through a medical procedure? Can we trust her to do everything necessary to revive us if we suffer cardiac arrest? Perhaps, we can, but her conduct is so outrageous there is plenty of room for doubt.
I fear the consequences of what this doctor did will be felt when other patients refuse to schedule procedures they otherwise would have scheduled. What Dr. Ingham did spills over to hundreds of hard working and professional anesthesiologists and surgeons. They should be the angriest of all over what happened.
That is why is was necessary to find her at fault and award a large sum of compensatory and punitive damages. Sometimes, the function of the system is to send a message and it sent a loud and clear one in this case.
I did read the article. Trust was breached by the patient, not the provider.
She was joking around and just likely relieving stress. Maybe this patient was an ahole himself. We don't really know the situation.
The fact is that this is not malpractice. If either of you know what malpractice actually means, then you would know that.
This is part of the reason why health care has gotten so bad in this country. Providers simply can't trust many of their patients. This guy obviously was looking for a payout and got one. Unfortunately, there are many patients just like him. There are just way too many frivolous lawsuits that should not go to court, much less be won.
Also, the verdict was not likely made by a jury of her peers, but likely made by people outside of medicine that don't understand medicine.
In some situations, being an ahole is malpractice. This doctor committed the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress and defamation through her treatment of this patient.
There are relationships and than there are relationships in life. The relationship between a physician and a patient is an extremely close an important one. When we present ourselves for a colonoscopy we are exposed in those intimate way to the gastroenterologist and the anesthesiologist. We pay a great deal for these procedures and there are certain reasonable expectations. Any sane would say that those expectations include not having the doctor joke about your having syphilis (especially when you don't), suggesting that your penis shouldn't be touched because of the syphilis infection, suggesting you should be punched in the face "to man you up". I saw another article where it was claimed she said someone should fire a gun up the patient's rectum. Although, I didn't hear that on the audio tape that has been made available. She suggested she would falsify a medical record claiming the patient had hemmroids when he did not. Interestingly, I hear the gastroenterologist kind of encouraging these comments and an MA present for the surgery laughing in the background. Its a most disturbing scene.
The real injury to the patient (and to others) was the violation of trust that occurred. Can we trust a doctor who would act like this to properly sedate us? Can we trust her to monitor our vital signs through a medical procedure? Can we trust her to do everything necessary to revive us if we suffer cardiac arrest? Perhaps, we can, but her conduct is so outrageous there is plenty of room for doubt.
I fear the consequences of what this doctor did will be felt when other patients refuse to schedule procedures they otherwise would have scheduled. What Dr. Ingham did spills over to hundreds of hard working and professional anesthesiologists and surgeons. They should be the angriest of all over what happened.
That is why is was necessary to find her at fault and award a large sum of compensatory and punitive damages. Sometimes, the function of the system is to send a message and it sent a loud and clear one in this case.
Mark,
You've made a good case here. I know where you are licensed. Given how that state's professional board that oversees regulated professions addresses complaints, do you think she should lose her license, had she practiced in that state? Lawsuits are direct ways patients send messages to physicians. Whether the clinician wins or loses depends on many factors, from those I've been privy to inside information. I can't recall one malpractice suit demanding the physician lose her license.
Fortunately, this anesthesiologists behavior is very atypical of any other anesthesiologist I know.
I did read the article. Trust was breached by the patient, not the provider.
She was joking around and just likely relieving stress. Maybe this patient was an ahole himself. We don't really know the situation.
The fact is that this is not malpractice. If either of you know what malpractice actually means, then you would know that.
This is part of the reason why health care has gotten so bad in this country. Providers simply can't trust many of their patients. This guy obviously was looking for a payout and got one. Unfortunately, there are many patients just like him. There are just way too many frivolous lawsuits that should not go to court, much less be won.
Also, the verdict was not likely made by a jury of her peers, but likely made by people outside of medicine that don't understand medicine.
You obviously don't know what malpractice is. It can be negligent conduct resulting in an injury, or it can be intentional misconduct ranging from a battery, to intentional infliction of harm, and/ or defamation of character. All are actionable under the law and all can result in an award of damages if certain elements are proven to the satisfaction of the jury.
The judge, the jury, and most of the people here disagree with you.
We really don't need a lecture on "frivolous lawsuits". Everyone knows they exist. The problem is that this wasn't one of them. Every case isn't a frivolous lawsuit, but I wonder if you believe that. If you knew the legal definition of a frivolous lawsuit, you would understand that this case is not one. Because before remedies kick into effect for having filed a "frivolous case", the defendant must first win the lawsuit. That's not what happened here is it? Anyway, take a look at this definition of frivolous lawsuit. You might find it educational.
There was room to argue over the amount of the damages, but no civilized person would seriously contend there is no harm here. Those who claim there was no harm must believe that patients are simply the chattel or property of doctors to do with as the physician desires. A doctor like this believes that patients are simply a necessary inconvenience on the way to making an income.
A "jury of peers" is a cross section of the community one lives in. Its not a group of physicians for a doctor who is on trial. Nor, would it be a bunch of burglars if you are on trial charged with the criminal offense of burglary. That's pretty simple and I hope you can understand the concept.
Last edited by markg91359; 06-26-2015 at 11:31 PM..
I wish doctors and nurses were perfect people. They aren't and neither are the rest of us. They do, however, choose to help you and me every single day of their working life.
Guess who pays the awards for these ridiculous lawsuits? Patients and policy holders.
This lawsuit award sucks.
They're not doing so every single day out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing so to make money off of our bodies. Make no mistake. If people don't have insurance, they have often been treated like crap because money could not be made off of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead
This is gross. Sadly, I also know of a few nurses that talk crap about patients. I know they suffer a lack of good care because of it. It's no wonder our healthcare system is one of our top 5 killers. The reason they make so much is because they are suppose to rise above it. I know plumbers that are more helpful and polite with their customers problems.
I think these phones are shedding a new light on how little we are committed to our careers here. We need to start having more training, in just about every area. We also need to do a better job of weeding out the freaks before we give them a job.
I'm finding that place and giving it a very bad rep. I hope all do the same. I think the more we tape the more everyone will see that it's not racism, it's jerkism in this problem we have an issue with and it's across the board. How unprofessional. I'm sure they've made some mistakes along the way with such a lack of concentration.
That's the problem revealed in this situation. Where the mouth goes the mind follows!
You obviously don't know what malpractice is. It can be negligent conduct resulting in an injury, or it can be intentional misconduct ranging from a battery, to intentional infliction of harm, and/ or defamation of character. All are actionable under the law and all can result in an award of damages if certain elements are proven to the satisfaction of the jury.
The judge, the jury, and most of the people here disagree with you.
We really don't need a lecture on "frivolous lawsuits". Everyone knows they exist. The problem is that this wasn't one of them. Every case isn't a frivolous lawsuit, but I wonder if you believe that. If you knew the legal definition of a frivolous lawsuit, you would understand that this case is not one. Because before remedies kick into effect for having filed a "frivolous case", the defendant must first win the lawsuit. That's not what happened here is it? Anyway, take a look at this definition of frivolous lawsuit. You might find it educational.
There was room to argue over the amount of the damages, but no civilized person would seriously contend there is no harm here. Those who claim there was no harm must believe that patients are simply the chattel or property of doctors to do with as the physician desires. A doctor like this believes that patients are simply a necessary inconvenience on the way to making an income.
A "jury of peers" is a cross section of the community one lives in. Its not a group of physicians for a doctor who is on trial. Nor, would it be a bunch of burglars if you are on trial charged with the criminal offense of burglary. That's pretty simple and I hope you can understand the concept.
Malpractice is defined as "any unintentional tort or any breach of contract based on health care or professional services rendered, or which should have been rendered, by a health care provider, to a patient.
Where was the breach of contract? The patient was going in for a procedure. He likely signed a consent form for the procedure. The procedure was done likely without complications.
And I do believe that this was a frivolous lawsuit. The guy sued for $1.5 million because a physician said something mean about him. Any rational person would at this and see it for what is: a chance to cash-in.
This is true unless the physician actually did falsify his chart. Then he has grounds for a lawsuit. But I did not see that mentioned in the article.
They're not doing so every single day out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing so to make money off of our bodies. Make no mistake. If people don't have insurance, they have often been treated like crap because money could not be made off of them.
Physicians are not a hive mind. People go into the field for various reasons. Some genuinely love patients. Others just want to make money. Some are a combination of both.
For the record, I do know of providers that specifically work in low-income areas out of the goodness of their hearts.
They're not doing so every single day out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing so to make money off of our bodies. Make no mistake. If people don't have insurance, they have often been treated like crap because money could not be made off of them.
That's the problem revealed in this situation. Where the mouth goes the mind follows!
I bet I know 1000 times more doctors and nurses than you do.
They are some of the hardest working, giving, generous people I know.
There is one ENT I think is bred from pure evil. I reported him myself.
Why? I think that is a pretty crazy amount for such a thing. Was she unprofessional? Of course, but talk is talk. It isn't like she stabbed him. I think the amounts of lawsuits are stupid, but whatever. We have more attorneys than any other country, so we are going to have every ambulance chaser around tripping over themselves to get a piece of any pie they can get.
Didn't you hear her say " I'm going to mark Hemorrhoids even though we don't see any and probably won't"?That's malpractice, not just unprofessional.
Seems like he got a lot more than he should have, but it's the right call.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
