When two prominent physicians say in an editorial of a medical journal that they edit that robotic surgery, fetal surgery and cord blood collection has no proven benefit because it costs too much for healthcare, I can't help but wonder what agenda they have going on.
Read the blog post to learn more about this outrageous editorial.
I was contacted today by a physician who claimed to do expert witness work for injured victims. He wanted some business. I asked him what his medical speciality was. Instead of a direct answer, he said he'd done consulting for attorneys before, and that if I want, I should go to his website to see what he has done.
I said "No. Tell me what your medical specialty is."
His reply- "Research."
"Are you board certified in any field of medicine?"
"No, but I help attorneys understand their case, and I don't have to be board certified to testify."
I asked, "How can you testify as a credible expert witness if you're not board certified?"
His response: "I do this all the time. I don't really testify. I help explain the case to you so you become more familiar with the medicine."
"What types of cases do you review?" I asked incredulously. "Surgery, pulmonary, cardiac, cancer..." was his reply.
I was amazed.
I then asked why I should hire him, and then have to hire a second expert to testify at trial? I only heard silence on the phone.
I asked again.
"Why should I hire two medical experts; one who reviews the case, and another who testifies?"
His reply was "Because I'm a better teacher."
"But wait," I said. "You still haven't answered my question."
"If I hire a medical expert to spend 5 hours to review medical records, and that expert feels the case has merit, I don't want to hire another expert two years later to review the case starting fresh, and close in time to the trial. That's double the work, and double the money. What do you have to say about that?"
He had no answer.
"But I'm a better teacher," he repeated.
"So are many of the experts I hire. They're clinical doctors with academic credentials who are board certified," I said.
I was getting frustrated talking with this guy.
"What good does it do for my client if you're a good teacher, but you can't come into court to teach a jury that our position is more likely right than wrong?"
His final answer was "I've been doing this for a long time, and you really should see my website."
My final reply was "Have a nice day."
The moral of the story: Don't let your medical malpractice attorney hire a "medical consultant" who does not testify, just to confirm you have a case, and then have to hire a new medical expert during your case. Make sure you hire a board certified expert in the specialty you need to review and to testify."
You just found out that your treating doctor was sued for medical malpractice. You do not know the details, nor do you know what injuries the patient claimed as a result of the alleged malpractice. Does the fact that your doctor was sued mean that he or she is not a good doctor? The short answer is "No," and here's why.
In this great Country we live in, an injured victim has a legal right to seek compensation from those people he believes caused him physical and emotional harm. This is true in New York as well. Our civil justice system is set up so that if you choose to bring a lawsuit against a doctor or hospital, then the "burden" of proving your case is on the person bringing the lawsuit. "That seems fair, right?"
In New York, an injured victim must show to a jury that what he is alleging is more likely right than wrong. In other words, he is not required to prove to a panel of 6 jurors that what he is saying is 100% absolutely true. Instead, he is only required to show that his version of his claim is "more likely true than not true." "But what if a juror just isn't sure about the injured victim's claim? What happens then?"
The answer is that a juror does not have to be absolutely sure. Instead, the juror just needs to determine whether what the plaintiff (the injured person bringing the lawsuit) is saying is more likely true than not true. If it is, then the jury is required to render a decision in favor of the plaintiff. During jury selection, a good trial lawyer may tell prospective jurors that "Dr. Jones is a good doctor and we are not here to dispute that. However, at a particular time, and at a particular place, this doctor was careless and that carelessness caused my client injury. When a doctor was careless, we expect that person to take responsibility for their actions."
To answer the question posed in the title of this article- just because a doctor is sued for malpractice does not mean that he is a bad doctor. This is especially true if the case has not finished and is still in litigation.
Most patients will not know what the facts of the case are. They will not know what the doctor's defenses are. Nor will they likely know the patient's injuries and whether that patient is permanently disabled. For all you know, the case may not have merit. On the other hand, it may.
The bottom line: Don't judge a person by accusations you may have overhead somewhere else. Wait for the outcome. Learn the details. If you are truly concerned, be straightforward with your doctor. Ask him directly. Ask for reassurance. The answer will help you make an informed decision about whether to continue your medical care with this doctor.
When a woman goes into labor is hardly something that can be controlled. Often it happens at the most inopportune time. We have all heard at least one story of a pregnant woman traversing a snowstorm, hailing a cab, or rushing to the hospital in the middle of the night.
As much as the timing of going into labor can catch a mother to be with her guard down, it can also catch hospital staff when it is down. A recent study of 700,000 births indicates that complications are much more likely at night then during the day.
You will likely learn about a developmental delay from your child's pediatrician. As your child grows they are expected to meet certain milestones; when a baby turns over, when a baby turns over, when they start to crawl, start to talk, start to walk, etc.
When your child is delayed in meeting their developmental milestones you start to question the pediatrician about why there's a delay. Often, your pediatrician will not be eager to point a finger at your obstetrician or any other doctor. So, how then do you get an honest answer about why your child is delayed?
You need to have your medical records evaluated by experts in the field of obstetrics, neonatology and pediatric neurology. Only then can we determine what the likely cause of your child's problems are from.
Keep in mind that there may be many different explanations for your child's delays:
It could be genetic, or hereditary.
It could be from a lack of oxygen during the course of your labor and delivery.
It could be from distress during labor that went unrecognized causing diminished blood flow and oxygen to the baby.
Regardless of the cause, it needs to be investigated to rule in, or rule out the possible causes. How do you do that? Simple.
You ned to contact an experienced attorney who handles medical malpractice cases on a daily basis. Only then can you answer the question, "Why is my child developmentally delayed?"
If you have legal questions about developmental delays in children I encourage you to pick up the phone and call me. I can answer your questions at 516-487-8207 or by email at lawmed10@yahoo.com.