Can I press a medical malpractice or medical negligence suit?

Question

I have Crohn's disease and was told by my specialist to avoid anti-inflamitories. My former doctor wanted to keep me on them for my knee pain. She also refused to give me anything for pain other than the anti-inflamitories and also wanted to stop me cold turkey off my anti anxiety medication which I have been taking for 8 years without an increase. I found another doctor that gave me my medications without complaint and also agreed the anti-inflamitories would be counter productive to my Crohn's treatments. My new doc is an Internest. Do I have a suit worth suing for? Can I sue my former doctor for putting more of my health at risk?

Extra info, I had emergency surgery in May of 2006 and found out then I had Crohn's. I was informed by the surgeon, and the GI specialist at that time to avoid the "Ibuprophen" but my family doc at the time told me to stay on them. She also didn't think I had Crohn's even tho it was found by pathology. Then she refused to refill my Xanax .025 and wanted me to stop them cold turkey. Thus is the reason why I wonder if I have a case. I don't want to use up court time with a frivoulous case, but I don't want her hurting or mistreating anyone else.

I forgot to mention also that I ended up back in the emergency room that November with a severe flare up of my Crohn's disease from taking the anti-inflamitories as she had told me to. The ER doc then also told me to stay away from them. I called her office, talked to her personally, and she said I needed to be on them. I hope that makes a clear picture.

Answer 1

You don't have a malpractice case here. While ibuprofen can worsen symptoms of Crohn's in some sufferers, it is not medically contraindicated as a treatment. Crohn's is an autoimmune response, and treatment regimens vary widely from physician to physician, as well as from patient to patient.

It does not appear, from what you have said, that you suffered any harm from taking the ibuprofen, since the symptoms disappear when the drug is eliminated.

What you are dealing with here is a difference of opinion between medical professionals, and not a case of clear malpractice.

Answer 2

In order to procede with a Med Mal case, you must first do due dilligence that there in fact was malpractice. (In the US.) What that entails is that your attorney has to get medical opinions that will support your claim. And yes, there are doctors who will review the claim for validity and testify. In order to pass this test, it has to be shown that what the doctor did was not reasonable and not within the standard of care of the medical community. In other words, if other doctors would do it, it's not malpractice. If you dont do that, or if you do it and file the suit in spite of a report that says it isnt malpractice, you could be subject to sanctions.

From what you are saying, this doesnt sound like malpractice. I'm not saying you shouldnt pursue it. But it will be expensive just to find out if there IS malpractice.

Another thing to consider is if you have damages. It doesnt sound as if your condition deteriorated or if there are any long term effects. So if there is malpractice without damages, you dont have a case.

Answer 3

Anyone who can find an attorney can sue for anything, but winning is something else. To have a cause you need to suffer loss. Did the action of the doctor cause you to lose money? Was his action so far outside the normal medical treatment standards that other doctors will testify in court he was wrong? Hard to find docs to do that!! If it's an honest difference in proper treatment, you are out of luck. Your health might be at risk, but you found a physician who would treat you as you wanted. Might you need to sue him at a later date?

Answer 4

It doesn't sound like you would have anything concrete to sue for. A doctor giving you bad advice is not enough to take someone to court--it would be a frivolous suit and would be the reason why health care in this country is so stinking expensive.

You would be better focused on trying to find for yourself alternative ways to deal with some of your pain and rehabilitation. Focusing on life from a positive perspective can often make a world of difference.

Answer 5

Have you been injured by any of this? You have 2 contradictory conditions there with doctor 1 treating your knee and doctor 2 treating your crohn's. Both are valid. Neither pose a serious threat to your health.

Long story short you have no case.

Answer 6

I agree. There are attorneys on the two components of tort regulation and the insurance marketplace has performed an dazzling job with brainwashing human beings with this delusion. i understand too many own harm attorneys to have faith it. those huge situations ensue some circumstances in a occupation in the event that they're fortunate. particularly some the time, this is vehicle injuries and workers comp situations. i think of it particularly is a states' rights subject and that i'm merely leaving it there. If states prefer to enact tort reform, they could. right here in Tennessee, we don't choose tort reform. we've juries.

Answer 7

i just heard on handle on the law on the radio that in order to sue for malpractice you have to prove that your condition is worse. if you can prove that the first doctor damaged you in any way or made your condition worse, then you can sue. these would be in the form of test results and stuff in medical records. it has to be quantifiable. if you can prove your worse, then you have a case.

Answer 8

You would need to have one doctor testify against another? Have fun!