Perusing through some of the comments on this malpractice case where an abdominal aneurysm was missed in the emergency setting:
I hope this verdict makes the doctors and health professionals in our area take notice of how important it is to address every possible diagnosis and not just take the easy way out.
Related posts:
- Why do doctors practice defensive medicine?
- Reasons why doctors practice defensive medicine
- Defensive medicine
- Defensive medicine in the news
- Relative value units, and how the RVU payment system doesn’t allow doctors to practice good medicine
- Defensive medicine op-ed reaction
- Defensive medicine costs more than money
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 2 comments }
Very cute. Those comments in the original article almost appear to be a series of planted testimonials for the attorney who won the case. But I guess they are not, or else the 1-800 number would have been included.
There isn’t enough information about the clinical circumstances to even begin to form an opinion about whether this verdict is a justification for defensive medicine or whether the guy was truly negligient by non-defensive ordinary state of the art standards.
The comment quoted is from an anonymous blogger, not the jury, not the attorneys, not the judge.
We already know that some of the bean brains strolling around think that we are supposed to rule out every possible diagnosis, but that is not the law and juries generally understand that by the time they get around to rendering a verdict, which is why docs win most jury verdicts and more than one person has to sit on juries in order to dilute out those bean brains.
Comments on this entry are closed.