Malpractice?

Question

4. A neurosurgeon receives a patient’s consent to a complicated surgery, one of the risks of which is loss of the use of a limb. The surgery is successful, but the patient loses the use of an arm, and sues for malpractice. What will likely happen?

Answer 1

Depends on the lawyers from both sides.

If the risks are clearly explained going in, and the patient has signed the consent form to have the operation, then, pardon the pun, the patient doesn't have a leg to stand on. ;)

Patient's lawyers will likely come from two angles

1) inadequate disclosure, that the surgeon / doctors did NOT inform the patient PROPERLY of the chances of the side effects. I am sure this was done in front of witnesses, so call the witnesses and that argument should go down in flames.

2) actual mistakes done during the procedure, which can't be many since the operation was a success. Operating room personnel will likely be called and asked if anything unusual happened, did any other doctor came in and assist, was any one else at the knife, so on and so forth. Probably not much there if everything's done by the book either.

Personally (I am NOT a lawyer nor do I work in law field) I thik that the patient has a friend who's an attorney and they are just trying to get some $$$ out of the hospital for "sympathy". They are betting that the hospital will pay them some $$$ out of pity to settle the suit without any admission of guilt nor any negative record against the surgeon. Hospital won't pay a penny, it's insurance that'll pay out any claims any way.

Sadly, insurance companies do pay out claims like this, because it is cheaper than going to court and actually litigate back and forth. Lawyers cost way too much even if all they do is send letters back and forth threatening each other (sort of).

Examples? A guy riding bicycle hit a pothole and flipped his bike, and claimed that a passing truck (which did NOT touch him, confirmed by him) scared him into jiggling the handlebar, thus hitting the pothole. He got $500 for a new bike (even though the bike shop he supposedly got the quote from had no record of him). In another case, a pedestrian was crossing a DARK road AT NIGHT on a BUSY street AWAY from a crosswalk, (no signal light) in front of 10 witnesses, and was struck and killed by a passing vehicle. The driver's insurance paid out the max coverage, even though the police reported that the driver was not at fault.

Let insurance work it out. It's in their court now. This sounds bad for the neurosurgeon, but don't worry about it. It's just a way for the patient to get some "blood money", so to speak.

Answer 2

My brother is a doctor and I can identify with the situation.
What will likely happen is that the insurance will settle to
avoid a prolonged court case strung out by a high priced
attorney...simply because it is cheaper. The problem is
that this increases malpractice insurance premiums which ultimately increases the cost of health care. Further, it
destroys the reputation and often the practice of the physician.

How is this malpractice if the surgery was successful?
What should happen is that the person looses the arm as
well as the lawsuit....as blunt as that may sound. This is
assuming the patient was well aware of the risks of the
surgery and signed necessary forms acknowledging
such.

If I drive my car on bald tires knowing that the manufacture in writing warns that doing so may cause a blowout....when I have one, should I expect a settlement from the tiremaker?

If so, why?

Answer 3

The patient signed a release prior to surgery as all patients do, explaining the risks or the operation. In this case the primary risk of losing the use of the limb resulted, which is a shame, but the Doctor is not liable as it was explained in the consent form. The patient will not recovery and will not win the suit.

Answer 4

The patient was aware of the outcome from complications due to having this surgery.The risk involved was clearly discussed and the patient signed a consent.No malpractice case here

Answer 5

Question would the patient expire without the operation, if so the loss (disclosed) to the patient as a risk tells me the Doctor knew what he was doing, the patient should be grateful and see what can be done to help his arm.

Answer 6

I'm only surmising this answer . But because he signed a consent form that he could not sue for malpractice: You have to prove negligence on the doctors part and I dont see it in this case.
bettyk

Answer 7

If the guy can prove that the surgeon did something outside the normal realm of the surgery that caused the loss, then he could win the case. However, most likely the surgeon's insurance will settle with the guy before it ever gets that far.

Answer 8

If that's one of the compliations "risk" factors, Just an expensive trial. The lawyers have to prove he was negligent. Don't expect this one to be settled. It's going to be a loss for the patient.

Answer 9

they will have to learn to live with it.