Decided to sue my Doctor

Tony do what you feel is right, and whatever the outcome, that allows you to move on.
Michael

Tony, I hope you keep us posted how it all works out. I'm sure it will be a long process, good luck. While I am not for a 'sue happy America' these types of mistakes are really a problem. It seems many Doctors order blood tests and unless you are proactive many times they never go over the results in any detail. Over time I finally learned to request a copy of every blood test.

My Mom's GP was always drawing blood for one reason or another and unless she had an immediate follow up the tests would sometimes get forgotten. While she was in charge of her own health I did not know this but in the past couple of years I found out. My Mom never asked for copies (She was always disorganized anyway and believed like many in her generation that you always trust your Doc). Last year after her being in and out of the hospital and rehabs one of her big issues was low sodium which in really low levels can cause confusion and almost dementia like symptoms. Well her dumb Doctor who was fully aware of this issue as she also was my Mom's attending Doctor in the hospital and rehab stays ordered a blood test in late October during an office visit in part to keep an eye on the sodium. Well our follow up appointment was not until January because it was getting very difficult to get my Mom out of the house. In late November I was starting to notice mental issues with my Mom again that made me think of the low sodium so I called the Doc and mentioned these symptoms and asked what the results of last months blood test was. The Doc gets on the phone and says something to the effect of ' The sodium level is 124 which is "DANGEROUSLY LOW". You need to START addressing that with a low liquid diet.' Really??? This was over a month after the blood test that she drew and apparently never looked at when the results came back. My Mom ended up in the hospital for a 3rd time a week or 2 later in large part because of this which just continued her downward spiral. We finally got her under the care of a kidney Doctor during that long stay and finally got a grip on the sodium issues. To this day she still has to take pills and have it monitored closely as it is a delicate balance. As much as my Mom loved that Doc we finally made her switch because there were too many issues similar to this that were staring to slip through the cracks. Trust your Doctor my a**! Man, everything has to be watched so closely it's ridiculous sometimes....Jim

ps...After an eventual 4th long hospital and rehab stay; not sodium related, my Mom is now in a nursing home. I think this would have eventually happened but I can't help but think that the first 3 hospital/rehab stays where low sodium was one of the major issues that the GP's lack of direction addressing this issue in a large part contributed to my Mom's fast decline. Granted we were ignorant ourselves and had to learn on the fly, granted too slowly; but some direction from the Doctor would have been nice.

Post Edited (JamesE) : 6/16/2016 9:05:14 AM (GMT-6)

tony,
How high was the PSA and how old were you then?

Not throwing cold water, but medical malpractice suits are tough even in seemingly obvious cases.

Have you engaged an attorney that specializes in the area? If so, and you are moving forward then it will be interesting to learn from you the grounds of the suit and the expected damages. These actions and financial recovery usually take many years.

I seem to remember that Purgatory was contemplating an action due to his serious radiation damage, but haven't heard anything for some time. Maybe he will join the discussion.

Good luck.

Tony w - we're all on your side...But, back in December you wrote:

"Just received my PSA Nearly 6 years since my RP I was Gleason 4x3 =7 PSA 9.
Only treatment was my RP, PSA today 0.04 same as 6 years ago but over the years
has fluctuated highest ever was 0.07 6 months ago but normally 0.05 go figure."

What kind of damages do you feel you've suffered?

Not knowing your PSA was a "little high" might have been a good thing... You might have been tested more often with an ever increasing sense that someday you'll have to deal with it.

compiler said...

This is a major problem. We patients should be getting written reports for every test and asking about any abnormal results.

Incidentally, I go to Hospital Records the day or two after my tests. I pay a dollar and get the written reports. I then scan the report(s) and save them in my MEDICAL TEST RESULTS file, which I back up regularly.

Mel

Most of the medical providers I see have MyChart or MyCarePlus available, so I can see all my lab and pathology reports online as soon as they become available. These are very convenient tools. No more waiting for calls, and no need for my internist to call me, as those tests are always normal. Usually, I get an email from MyChart two or three days after any visit telling me to log in and see my results. Great systems if they are available to you.

I agree with JNF and Steve...although we should really consult our resident legal eagle, halbert. The cases I've read about involve metastatic cases.

I'm surprised your lawyer thinks that there is adequate compensation to be had.

The purpose of compensation laws is to put the plaintiff back into the position they would have been, had the negligence not occurred. Compensation is calculated on the basis of need.

In Australia, compensation is awarded for :-

1. pain and suffering
2. income you may have forfeited whilst recovering from the condition attributed to the negligence
3. future income you may lose (known as future economic loss) as a result of the health care providers negligence
4. costs associated with treatment, medications, nursing services, rehabilitation courses etc to assist in the recovery and injury repair process.

Jack:

Good points, but

Before you even discuss compensation, you have to determine if malpractice occurred. Was there some violation of a reasonable standard of care here. There might be, but I would want to know the specific test results before reaching conclusions.

Mel

Generally speaking, without malpractice, there is no damage or award. However, just because there is malpractice does not mean there is damage or an award. I understand that it takes both, malpractice and damage in order to get an award.

I assume the first damage would have been an unnecessary surgery brought on by the fact the PSA had risen to a level that forced the surgery, that if caught sooner would have meant less invasive treatment and thus no damage. Since surgery is often the most common form of treatment, it is hard to reckon it could be the damage or injury. Of course side effects could also be part of the injury or damage such as impotence or incontinence from an unnecessary surgery. These are embodied in JackH's list. However the side effects of surgery are well known and we sign off understanding the risk.

Further, to my knowledge, prostate surgery is never performed because one is in immediate and eminent danger and is most always considered to be elective. With the various accepted treatments it could be argued that prostate surgery per se is not even necessary, but just one of many different treatment methods. Simply put, if we want to avoid the expected and likely side effects of surgery we choose some other treatment method that presents side effects we are more likely to accept. I think all this makes a suit in this situation very difficult, but I am not an attorney that specializes in this area. Only Tony can tell us what his injury from the situation has been.

Mel the statute definition and interpretation becomes important. The discovery of the omission, if after the statute runs, could be important, but not necessarily. If the omission would have made little or no difference in the treatment direction, condition, survival, injury, etc. then it would probably not matter.

We have another member that was not informed of a slightly elevated PSA for many years despite frequent meetings with the doc. Then when the PSA was found in the high 50's and cancer having invaded the bladder, the suggestion was to remove everything. Thankfully, the man has been treating the disease for several years, but a lot of damage was done that has cost him and his family very dearly. Does he have grounds for an action? I certainly don't know, nor have I asked.

Let us know how it comes out.

Oh, and Jack, not that you care what I think, but you're now on ignore.

Its a waste of time imo...move on...turn the corner on it ...you don't need to spend the next 8 years reliving this...life is to short... I know its hard to put this crap behind you...replace it with good dreams of the future... "choose you life or death"?

Well it's over before it started just had a meeting with my lawyer who informed me that there is a 3 year limitation to sue over medical negligence. It was never about the money or moving on it was to hold the GP accountable so he never did this to others.He should take time to read all pathology results after all he ordered them how many other of his patients are walking around with a potential problem. My new GP sends me a text message to my cell advising me my pathology results are in and to make a appointmentment to view results much better .
tony w.