QUESTION
Is it legal for a doctor to not inform a patient of her condition even if she’s going to die anyway?
Asked on Mar 06th, 2014 on Litigation - Wisconsin
More details to this question:
My grandmother died sometime last year. She had COPD, high blood pressure, fast heart rate and shortness of breath (which was all caused by heart problems in the end). At some point her heart problem became worst. Before she died her heart doctor had done some test and saw she had dramatic heart disease. But he never mentioned that that’s what it was. He only explained that her heart was leaking. When I asked more questions he brushed me off. Sometime later we went back to him and her heart rate was over 100 and he was going to let her go home without any medications to slow it down. He had also scheduled another stress test for her that same day but because of the heart rate she was unable to take it. We later found out that she did not only have a leaking vale she had a dramatic heart. Her COPD was to the point where she needed an oxygen tank but I was informed that the rapid decline of her lungs may have been because of her heart.
5 ANSWERS
James Eugene Hasser
Drs do have a duty to inform the patient of their condition, but if you are asking if malpractice occurred, it takes the opinion of a medical expert to answer your question. Experienced medical malpractice lawyers typically have such experts available. Consider consulting one. Good luck.
Answered on Mar 07th, 2014 at 11:12 AM
Personal Injury Attorney serving Charlotte, NC
at
Paul Whitfield and Associates P.A.
Update Your Profile
I think you may be confused. I have never heard of a "dramatic" heart. Check your terms. You have perhaps a medical question, a very sick woman who you say was not told certain things by her doctor. Who makes that decision? What difference did it make or would it make? Sounds like probably nothing. but if you can afford to do it, get the entire chart and have a heart specialist review it and ask him. it will likely cost you a couple of thousand to pay the expert to do this. It may not be worth the cost.
Answered on Mar 07th, 2014 at 9:06 AM
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Attorney serving Syracuse, NY
at
Andrew T. Velonis, P.C.
Update Your Profile
From what you describe, it sounds like he did inform her. He may have used different words, but it seems he did tell her of the condition.
Answered on Mar 07th, 2014 at 8:52 AM
Edwin K. Niles
Medical and dental malpractice claims are, by their nature, very difficult. Under California law, it is necessary, before filing suit, to obtain an affidavit from another professional, verifying that he has reviewed the medical charts and has found that there was negligence. This can cost several thousand dollars, and most attorneys expect that the client will cover this cost. Negligence could be defined as the failure to use reasonable care; not all bad outcomes are the result of negligence. You should also be aware that there is a cap on the amount of recovery for pain and suffering, thanks to the doctor lobby. Sometimes one has a good case theoretically, but the damages are too small to warrant a suit. For these reasons, not many lawyers handle malpractice cases. You should seek a specialist. You can contact your local bar association for a referral.
Answered on Mar 06th, 2014 at 11:25 PM
1 Award
The law of informed consent was hit hard by the Republicans last year when they passed a bill that impacts the facts contained in your inquiry. Prior to the 2013 change in the law, a doctor was required to inform a patient of information that a reasonable patient would want to know. The new law provides that a doctor only has to provide information that a reasonable doctor would give to a patient. In other words, if a doctor has other doctors say that it would be reasonable not to tell a patient the type of information contained in your inquiry, there is no case, whereas the old law looked at everything from the perspective of the patient.
Answered on Mar 06th, 2014 at 11:23 PM