Re: Sterilization
From: R. Daniel Braun (rd.braun@gmail.com)
Tue Mar 1 08:21:53 2005
The injury is $4000 and an extra anesthetic and the risk of a second
procedure. The violation of the standard of care was in not having the
papers available.
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 09:12:53 -0600, ainsron <ainsron@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Where is the injury? The only way I can see the standard of care not being
> met in this type of situation would be if the surgeon misled the patient
> into thinking he would do the tubal prior to the cesarean section and then
> decided not to perform it without informing the patient in advance. There
> are plenty of options available to this patient to avoid future pregnancies
> that would cost less, including vasectomy, continuation of Depo Provera and
> IUDs.
>
> Ronald E. Ainsworth
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of Andrew
> Folley
> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:05 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
> Subject: RE: Sterilization
>
> I would have been inclined to tie her tubes originally at the time of
> Csection with pts consent. As it turns out the patient has incurred an
> "injury" in that she has to have a xecond operation and $4000 cost. the
> question is whether or not there was a breach in the standard of care.Whose
> responsibility was it to have the papers at the hospital at the time of the
>
> original c-section? it is sticky but I would not be surprised if they rule
> for the defendant. Andrew
>
> >From: ainsron@sbcglobal.net (Dr. Ainsworth)
> >Reply-To: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net
> >To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net>
> >Subject: Sterilization
> >Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 19:08:42 -0600
> >
> >I colleague of mine asked me a question that I wanted to pass on. She
> >did a emergency cesarean section a year ago on a patient who had
> >previously signed papers for sterilization. The papers weren't
> >available in the hospital at the time of the surgery and she told the
> >patient that could not do the tubal at that time. The patient appeared
> >to understand, saw her postpartum and received two depo-provera
> >injections for birth control. The patient saw another MD who did the
> >tubal recently. My colleague recently received a letter from the
> >patient's attorney demanding that she pay ~$4000 for the sterilization
> >procedure because of the extra cost and inconvenience it had been to
> >this patient. I told her to tell the attorney to stick it in his ear
> >(actually it was another three letter orifice on the end of the
> >alimentary tract) and do not see any liability she has in these
> >circumstances. What do you think and what would you do??
> >
>
--
R. Daniel Braun
Kinky for Governor
|
|
