Re: A new twist on malpractice (Update)...
From: AMD (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Thu, 18 May 2000 18:17:19 -0500 (CDT)
I'm sure you will all be glad to know that the jury didn't buy it and
returned in favor of the doctors. Of course, there may be no way to
measure or compensate for the damage to their practices and reputations.
Lots of media coverage of the allegations, barely a mention of the
outcome. But I bet this woman will always have a red flag on her
medical charts!!!! Talk about a problem patient....
It has been pretty awful seeing this case played out in the media (the
trial was taped on the news), especially some of the things the father
said about the boy. I can not imagine going on record testifying what a
burden your child is simply because he exists.
BTW -- she was seeking 143k in damages for cost of rearing the child and
40k in lost income. I can only hope that it costs me that little to
raise either of my kids!!:)
Andrea
At Wed, 3 May 2000, R. Daniel Braun, MD wrote:
>
>At Wed, 3 May 2000, AMD wrote:
>>
>>Did ya'll know that a patient's unplanned pregancy could be your fault??
>>(please read the sarcasm here!!!)
>>
>>A woman here is suing the doctors at a family practice clinic for
>>failing to diagnose her pregnancy until it was too late for an abortion.
>>She is claiming damages as the cost of raising the child (don't know the
>>$$ amount asked).
>>
>>She claims to have seen the doctor on multiple occasions over a couple
>>of months for her complaints of breast tenderness, bloating, and "funny"
>>feelings in her abdomen. They finally sent her for a diagnostic US and
>>found a baby. However, she claims that she wasn't told at the US that
>>she was about 16-19 weeks, and didn't know how far along she was until
>>the doctor told her at 24 weeks, which is 1 week too late for an
>>abortion here. Supposedly she told the doctors earlier that she would
>>want an abortion if her problems were due to being pregnant. There are
>>reports that she has had 3-4 other abortions, in addition to her 2-3
>>children. The child in question is now almost 3 years old.
>>
>>This case is actually going jury trial here. My initial reaction to
>>this is total disgust. But when I think about it, I wonder if there
>>actually was some sort of incompetence or malfeasance here. I would
>>think any reasonably competent doctor could diagnose a 2nd-trimester
>>pregnancy, but I also wonder why she didn't do a HPT if she had any
>>suspicions of pregnancy. Heck, any time I've gone to the doctor with
>>any sort of complaint between my neck and my knees, pregnancy is one of
>>the top 3 things they want to rule out. What if the doctor deliberately
>>withheld the information to prevent her from getting the abortion? That
>>would certainly be unethical.
>>
>>So should doctors be held legally and financially responsible for
>>diagnosing a pregnancy in a timely manner, as they would cancer or any
>>other disease? Should the costs of raising a child be considered
>>"damages" of medical malpractice? Even if damages aren't awarded, should
>>a doctor be punished for such a substantial error (and how)? I know our
>>BOMEX is virtually useless here when it comes to disciplining doctors.
>>
>>I find this case somewhat troubling. It certainly opens a big can of
>>worms, particularly if the jury awards her a substantial sum of money.
>>
>>Just food for thought.
>>
>>AndreaD
>
>Interesting! The issue that will need to be decided upon is whether or
>not the physician witheld the information. That would as you say be
>unethical. I am not sure but I would suspect it could be considered a
>violation of the standard of care.
>However that is still not Malpractice. Malpractice requires 4 elements.
>1. A duty to the patient must have been established i.e. tha
>patient-physician relationship. 2. The standard of care must have been
>violated. 3. Damges must have occurred. and 4. The damages must have
>resulted from the violation of the standard of care.
>This is what is sometimes referred to as a wrongful LIFE suit. In the
>past, most courts have stated that a LIFE is not damages, but a blessing
>to be enjoyed.
>
>RDB
>
>--
>R. Daniel Braun, MD FACOG FOG
>
>This is for educational purposes only, and is not intended to be replacement or substitute for consultation and examination by an appropriate medical professional. Due to time constraints, private e-mails cannot be answered.
>
![[ Women's Health Forum ]](http://www.obgyn.net/images_women/wh-forum.gif)