Comments on: Is a large settlement sending the right message?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 20:30:00 +0000

Your uncle likes to shit on men’s dicks? No wonder you don’t like this country. That’s not really what we’re into here.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 18:51:00 +0000

“Yeah, I’m sure that was it. They just felt bad for them”

You were there? Have you wiped my Uncle’s shit off your dick yet? He’s a veteran, and has 2 kids who became doctors. He’s a retired colonel in the army, and had to waste his time through 8 lawsuits becuase of dickweeds like you. Nice country.

By: Samson Isberg

Samson Isberg — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:02:00 +0000

Few of us are miracle workers. Our profession used to be ALWAYS to comfort the patient, SOMETIMES to alleviate her sufferings, and RARELY to cure her disease.
What makes me disgusted with the present system is that the lawyers demand that you ALWAYS cure, and if you try to COMFORT, your words may be played back at you with a twist in a courtroom. (Don’t give me that “Sorry works”, – it doesn’t)…and if you try to alleviate pain and suffering, – well, see where that brought poor dr Pou of New Orleans…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 14:51:00 +0000

" It was after all not the doctor who killed her, but a disease."

If that's your take, then why go to a doctor at all? If they are not going to be of any assistance, or at least you can't count on them for anything, what's the point? After all, we're all going to die. How come you're "miracle workers" when things go right, and take no responsibility when they go wrong?

"I guess they deserve to spend a week in court too? "

No one spent any time in court. Learn to read.

" My uncle is a well known professor of surgery and has been sued EIGHT times, with only one "win" for the sodomites. THe only win was because the family was poor, so the jury felt bad for them."

Yeah, I'm sure that was it. They just felt bad for them.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 14:22:00 +0000

How about the on-call doc who was at home who was likely named because his name was on the chart. Or the anesthesiologist who never actually saw the patient, but was listed as the anesthesiologist? I guess they deserve to spend a week in court too? How many of us get named in suits on patients we have nothing to do with, because the parasites are “shaking the tree’ to see what they can win? My uncle is a well known professor of surgery and has been sued EIGHT times, with only one “win” for the sodomites. THe only win was because the family was poor, so the jury felt bad for them. He had nothing to do with most of the suits, but he has spent months in court because of our completely fucked-up system. I’m being sued for one I never saw either. It takes a toll on you.

By: Samson Isberg

Samson Isberg — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 06:32:00 +0000

I seems that our colleague who wrote the original article has missed something; he obviously thinks that the intracranial hemorrhage couldn’t be ascribed to the elevated blood pressure, as the hypertension was an acute phenomenon. In fact, the rapid rise in blood pressure is the tell-tale sign of impending doom here, and if he had given her labetalol (or hydralazine, as you apparently prefer in the US) IV as soon as the diagnosis of severe pre-eclampsia was made, the chances are pretty good that the hemorrhage wouldn’t have occured.
So in this case the OB – in my humble opinion – gave the patient less-than-optimum care. Whether the bereaved husband should have money for this or not is a different question. It was after all not the doctor who killed her, but a disease.
Dr P in this story, however, ought to be taken out behind the hospital and shot.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:58:00 +0000

Medical negligence is, in legal terms, a breach of a duty of reasonable care. In layman's terms, the heart of negligence is conduct unreasonable in the circumstances.

The author noted that this patient had hypertension during labor, and, dollars to donuts, was lulled into complacancy by her benign multiparous past OB history.

My take on this story is that the author, a non-OB, believed that delivery plus mag sulphate was adequate treatment. Yes all pre-eclamptics and eclamptics need mag, but it's prophylaxis. The hypertension still needed to be treated. One-third of eclampsia occurs post-partum.

It was unreasonable for this patient not to have had her hypertension addressed intra-partum, thus the negligence, thus the appropriate compensation to her estate. The author should read up on pre-eclampsia/eclampsia.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 01:38:00 +0000

methyldopa wouldn’t have been appropriate. Try hydralazine.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:17:00 +0000

I am usually on here railing against the sodomites but you have to admit, instead of yelling “Puja! mama, Puja!”, this guy should have considered starting methyldopa or calling renal / cardiology consult after the house ob told him “This is pre-eclampsia”. Too bad this guy never read kevinmd he would have saved himself from a lawsuit from that illegal piece of shit…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:04:00 +0000

Or we could start treating allopathic medicine like we treat fire and police services. If the providers want special treatment (and yes government employess have even more immunity than the the MDieties from a liability perspective) than there are going to be some tradeoffs.