November 16, 2009

Nurse's Negligence Caused Child’s Brain Injury

Nurse Negligent

In a decision released last week, Justice Tausendfreund has ruled that a nurse at St. Joseph's Children’s Hospital was negligent and that the nurse’s negligence caused catastrophic brain injuries to a baby, Danny Vuong.

Danny’s mother, Ms. Giang was admitted to St. Joseph’s Hospital on June 12, 2991. Her pregnancy had been normal and uneventful.

Fetal Heart Monitor Results Not Normal

Two nurses were assigned to Ms. Giang to monitor the baby’s fetal heart rate. They used an electronic fetal heart monitor (EFM) to monitor the baby’s heart rate.

When the nurse checked the heart monitor it showed a range of 170 beats per minute, a reading that is outside the normal range. The nurse assumed that she had simply heard a normal acceleration of the baby’s heart rate. However, the nurse also recognized that the increased heart rate could also be a sign of tachycardia, an abnormal elevation in the heart rate which is a sign of fetal distress.

Didn't Check Again

But she didn't check the baby's heart rate again to see if it had returned to normal! 20 Minute Delay

Unfortunately, the nurse did not return to Ms. Giang to conduct another fetal heart rate monitor until 20 minutes later. By that time, the baby’s heart rate had dropped precipitously and an emergency C-section was performed.

The surgeon who performed the c-section found that the umbilical cord had been wrapped around Danny’s neck. Danny was born suffering from the results of acute hypoxia-ischemia resulting in severe brain damage.

Justice Tausendfreund ruled that:

“Had Danny been born 10 minutes earlier he would have been at great risk for some neurological injury, but he would not have sustained the depth or extent of injury he did.

“I find that had Danny been born 10 minutes earlier, it would have significantly and materially reduced both the extent and nature of the injury to Danny’s brain and would have significantly and materially reduced the degree of functional impairment.”

Nurse Failed to Meet Standard of Care

Justice Tausendfreund ruled that the nurse had failed to meet the standard of care expected of her. Had she acted in accordance with the standard of care and continued to monitor the baby’s heart rate to confirm her assumptions she would have realized that the baby was suffering a medical emergency. As a result, the Judge ruled that the nurse’s negligence was the cause of baby Danny’s catastrophic brain injuries.

Causation in Medical Malpractice Claims

This case shows how a difference of just minutes can mean the difference between life and death. The difference between having a healthy baby and a baby who will live his life severely debilitated by brain injury.

The vast majority of medical malpractice claims fail because the victim is not able to prove that the the health provider's negligence caused or materially contributed to their injury.

Continue reading "Nurse's Negligence Caused Child’s Brain Injury" »

Bookmark and Share

November 11, 2009

Nurses Have a Duty to Ensure Doctors Meet the Standard of Care

Nurses Duty to Ensure Appropriate Care

A recent decision from Ontario has found that nurses have a duty to ensure patients receive appropriate care from a responsible physician when faced with a medical emergency.

The court found that the duty to ensure that the patient is seen by a appropriate physician exists even when the patient has already been seen by a resident physician.

Failed to Meet Standard of Care

In Milne v. St. Joseph’s Health Centre, Justice Morissette found that an experienced obstetrical nurse and an obstetrical resident both failed to meet the standard of care expected of a reasonable nurse and physician during the birth of Anne Louise Milne’s son Jessy.

Jessy suffered catastrophic brain damage due to a premature separation of Ms. Milne's placenta from her uterus, resulting in internal bleeding. Ms. Milne was admitted to the delivery unit of the St. Joseph’s Health Centre at 1:20 PM on August 18, 1997.

Nurse Suspected Medical Emergency

The obstetric nurse who took her vital signs and applied the fetal heart rate monitor strongly suspected that Ms. Milne had suffered a placental abruption. The nurse testified at trial that she understand that a placental abruption was a medical emergency and might require a cesarean section in order to prevent brain damage due to the lack of oxygen to the fetus.

At 2:00 PM Ms. Milne was assessed by an obstetric resident who performed an ultrasound which showed that the fetus was not breathing or moving.

Doctor Suspected Medical Emergency

The resident physician also suspected a placental abruption but neither one of them discussed their concerns with the other nor did they consider an appropriate course of action.

No One Talked to Doctor in Charge

The nurse testified that she expected the resident physician to contact the attending obstetrician in charge of Ms. Milne to determine her appropriate treatment.

Approximately 35 minutes after the resident examined Ms. Milne the obstetric nurse finally asked another physician to assess Ms. Milne. The physician immediately diagnosed Ms. Milne’s condition and ordered a emergency cesarean section.

Justice Morissette found that delivering baby Jessy even 10 minutes earlier would have prevented his severe brain damage.

Lack of Communication Can Have Catastrophic Consequences

In many hospitals nurses and physicians work in what is called a “team environment”. This case emphasizes the need for communication between team members. It also emphasizes the importance of coming up with a proposed plan of treatment with every patient.

Continue reading "Nurses Have a Duty to Ensure Doctors Meet the Standard of Care" »

Bookmark and Share

September 17, 2009

$4.5 Million Award for Child Who Suffered Cerebral Palsy Due to Birth Trauma

Court Approves Multi-Million Dollar Settlement

The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia has approved a settlement in a medical malpractice case awarding 4.5 million dollars in compensation to a child who suffered cerebral palsy as a result of injuries suffered during his birth.

Very Complex Claim

In the decision of Saulnier v. Tynski et. al, Justice Patrick Duncan said in his decision:

“Let me say that this obviously was a very complex medical malpractice claim.”

Payments for Life
Justice Duncan approved the settlement of 4.5 million dollars. 56% of the funds are being placed in a structured settlement to provide periodic payments to Jacob Saulnier for the rest of his life.

Parents Compensated for Extraordinary Services

The court also approved payment of $125,000.00 each for the child’s parents to recognize the burden that has been placed on them for the extraordinary services the now have to provide to their child to care for him as a result of his injuries. Justice Duncan said:

“I accept that these parents have already undergone a lot of stress and that they probably will continue to do so in trying to provide for their son, and that the settlement should do what it can accomplish in terms of trying to minimize the additional stressors.”
Medical malpractice cases are among the most complicated, time consuming, and risky kinds of personal injury litigation.

There is tremendous debate within the medical and scientific community as to the causes of cerebral palsy. Establishing causation in a medical malpractice claim is often a huge, sometimes insurmountable, hurtle.

No amount of money will ever change what happened to young Jacob Saulnier. However, this is a tremendous result in what was a challenging and complicated case.

Continue reading "$4.5 Million Award for Child Who Suffered Cerebral Palsy Due to Birth Trauma" »

Bookmark and Share

July 15, 2009

Birth Injuries and Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring: New Guidelines Make it Harder to Sue?

ACOG Issues New Practice Guidelines

In the July 2009 issue of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) issued practice bulletin No. 106: Intrapartum Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring.

The new bulletin is the most recent statement from the College on interpretation of fetal heart rate tracings and management of labour.

Electronic Fetal Monitoring (EFM) has grown dramatically. In 1980 it was used on 45% of pregnant women to more than 85% of pregnant women in 2002. However, one of the authors of the study, Dr. George Macones, has stated that:

“Although EFM is the most common obstetric procedure today, unfortunately it hasn’t reduced perinatal mortality or the risk of cerebral palsy.”
Unfortunately, for those of us who represent children who have been injured during birth, it appears that the bulletin has been drafted to be even more protective of the practice of physicians than past clinical guidelines on the same subject.

While the data for the study may have been collected for the purpose of providing clinical guidance to obstetricians in managing labour, I have no doubt that the guidelines will be used in future medical malpractice claims to establish the standard of care for how doctors should interpret and react to different fetal tracings.

The revised guidelines have created a 3-tier classification system for EFM tracings:

Category 1 tracings are classified "normal" and do not require specific intervention.

Category 2 tracings are classified "indeterminate". They require further investigation and surveillance.

Category 3 tracings are classified "abnormal" and require immediate intervention. For example, providing oxygen to the mother, changing her position, stopping labor stimulation, treating maternal hypotension, or initiating prompt delivery if the tracings do not return to normal.

The guidelines contain a number of clinical recommendations including the following:

The false-positive rate of EFM for predicting cerebral palsy exceeds 99%.
The use of EFM is linked to higher rates of both vacuum and forceps operative vaginal delivery, as well as of cesarean delivery for abnormal FHR patterns and/or acidosis.
Recurrent variable decelerations on the FHR tracing should lead to consideration of amnioinfusion to relieve umbilical cord compression.


One of the most controversial statements in the study is that:

"Re-interpretation of the FHR tracing may not reliable; especially once the neonatal outcome is known.”
In other words, the guidelines suggest that the medical opinions of experts who have been retained to help injured plaintiffs shouldn’t be accepted because their evidence "may not be reliable".

The Guidelines fail to point out that the opposite is also true: re-interpretation of tracing may be reliable. It depends on the facts of each particular case.

Simply put, the guidelines suggest that medical experts are not entitled to “second guess” the opinion of the doctor in charge of the delivery.

The plaintiff in a medical malpractice claim bears the burden of proof. The plaintiff must provide expert evidence to establish that the defendant doctor(s) were in fact negligent!

These guidelines appear to be a transparent attempt to limit the evidence of experts who are willing to testify on behalf of plaintiffs.

It remains to be seen what weight, if any, the courts place on the guidelines.

Continue reading "Birth Injuries and Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring: New Guidelines Make it Harder to Sue?" »

Bookmark and Share

July 9, 2009

99% Of Potential Medical Malpractice Victims Never File a Claim!

Almost 100,000 Medical Mistakes Each Year in Canada

The Canadian Medical Association has determined that over 87,000 patients in Canada suffer an adverse event (medical error or mistake) each year.

The same study determined that more than 24,000 people die each year due to medical errors.

That is more than 100,000 potential medical malpractice claims in Canada every year!

Role of the CMPA

In Canada, most doctors are defended by a single organization, the Canadian Medical Protection Association (the C.M.P.A.).

Between 2002 and 2006 the C.M.P.A. reported that only 5,246 were filed against doctors in Canada. About 1,000 claims per year.

That means that out of 100,000 potential medical malpractice claims, 99% of potential medical malpractice victims never even filed a claim!

Their appears to be a perception that people are becoming more litigious, filing more lawsuits, and making frivolous claims. These statistics tell the real truth, that most potential victims of medical malpractice never receive compensation for their injuries.

Even if an injured patient or one of their family members decides to bring forward a claim, they face odds that can seem insurmountable. The C.M.P.A. has almost 3 billion dollars in assets that they can use to hire the best experts and lawyers that money can buy to defend malpractice claims.

70% of Claims Dismissed or Abandoned

According to the C.M.P.A.’s annual reports more than 70% of medical malpractice lawsuits are dismissed or abandoned before trial because the victim or their family quit, ran out of money, or died before trial.

Doctors Win 80% of Trials

Of 577 cases that went to trial over the last several years, only 121 resulted in a verdict for the victim. In other words, only 20% of medical malpractice plaintiffs who went to court actually won their trial.

Medical malpractice claims are among the most complicated, expensive and risky types of litigation. If you think you or a family member may have been a victim of medical malpractice you owe it to yourself to get the advice of a experienced medical malpractice lawyer before deciding whether or not to pursue a claim.

Continue reading "99% Of Potential Medical Malpractice Victims Never File a Claim!" »

June 29, 2009

The Consumer’s Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims in Canada

Why Did You Write The Book?

I get asked that a lot. There's a ton of work that goes into writing a book about medical malpractice claims. Most books about the topic are written by lawyers, for lawyers, and they are pretty dry reading.

I wanted to write a book that the average person could pick up and read and come away better educated and informed about the medical malpractice claims process and what is involved in filing a medical malpractice claim.

What Makes a Good Doctor?

The British Medical Journal once surveyed people in 24 countries around the world and asked them: “What makes a good doctor?”

The answers included qualities like compassion, understanding, honesty, humanity, competence, commitment, empathy, respect, creativity and a sense of justice.

What Makes a Good Lawyer?

I believe that the qualities shared by great doctors are also traits shared by great lawyers. Especially, a sense of justice.

Since graduating from law school I have devoted my career to trying to help people who truly need help, people looking for fairness, people who need justice.

That is why I do medical malpractice litigation and that is why I wrote The Consumer’s Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims in Canada. To provide information to people who have been seriously injured as a result of medical malpractice. To help people who have been betrayed by the person or persons that they had to trust the most, their doctor, their nurse, their health care provider.

Most Victims Never File a Claim

Every research study that has been done about medical malpractice claims has concluded that most victims of medical malpractice never contact a lawyer or file a claim.

What You Need to Know

You may not actually have the grounds for a medical malpractice claim, but you do need to have certain important information to know if you have a potential claim and what you need to do to protect your rights if you have been a victim of medical malpractice.

I wrote The Consumer’s Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims in Canada so that people who may have suffered a loss as a result of medical malpractice can have this information.


Continue reading "The Consumer’s Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims in Canada" »

June 24, 2009

Medical Malpractice Claims: The Burden of Proof and O.J. Simpson

When someone dies unexpectedly, or suffers a serious but unexpected injury, while they are in a hospital or under the care of a doctor, it is human nature to assume that the hospital or doctor must have made a mistake. Many clients come to me and say: "How could this have happened? The doctor must have screwed up!"

We all want to believe that when something really bad happens to good people, someone will be held responsible. But that is not always the case.

Burden of Proof

The plaintiff (you) has the burden (responsibility) of proving your claim.

Beyond Reasonable Doubt

Anyone who has watched Law & Order or similar shows on television has heard the term: “proof beyond reasonable doubt”. But that is not the burden that applies in a medical malpractice claim. That is the burden of proof that applies to criminal prosecutions.

Balance of Probabilities

In a medical malpractice compensation claim you have the burden of proof: “on the balance of probabilities”. In other words, is it more likely than not that the doctor (or nurse or other health care provider) was negligent and did that negligence cause your injuries?

Scales%20of%20Justice.jpg

Scales of Justice?

The easiest way to understand this burden is to consider a pair of scales. All of the evidence for your claim is placed on one side of the scale. All of the evidence against your claim is placed on the other side of the scale. As long as the scales tip to the side for your claim, even a little bit, then you have met the burden of proof on the balance of probabilities.

What Does OJ Have to Do With The Burden of Proof?

OJ Simpson is a living example of the difference between the criminal and civil standards of proof. As everyone in the world now knows, O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murdering his wife, Nicole Simpson and her friend Ron Goldman because the jury did not believe that the prosecutors had proven the criminal charges beyond reasonable doubt.

However, when the Goldman family sued O.J. Simpson civilly for causing Ron Goldman’s death, the jury decided that the family had proved on the balance of probabilities that O.J. Simpson was responsible for Ron Goldman’s death.


Continue reading "Medical Malpractice Claims: The Burden of Proof and O.J. Simpson" »

June 21, 2009

Income Loss in Medical Malpractice Claims

Most of my medical malpractice clients have suffered catastrophic injuries that prevent them from being able to return to work or, in the case of infants and children, will prevent them from ever being able to work.

Economic Losses from Medical Malpractice

There are 2 ways to calculate economic losses suffered as a result of medical malpractice. The court will have to determine whether you have suffered an actual income loss or whether you have suffered a diminished earning capacity.

Income Loss from Medical Malpractice

If your are injured as a result of medical malpractice and your injuries prevent you from being able to work for days, weeks, months, or permanently then you can make a claim for the actual income you have lost as a result of the medical malpractice.

Income loss includes both:

Past Income Loss: You are entitled to be compensated for your actual income loss up to the date of settlement or trial. Usually this loss is one that is capable of being calculated fairly accurately. For example, if you were being paid $500.00 a week and you can't work for 4 weeks as a result of your injuries, you are entitled to receive 4 weeks pay ($2,000.00) to compensate you for your past loss of income.
Future Loss of Income: If your injuries are going to prevent you from being able to work in the future, you are also entitled to be compensated for that loss. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a crystal ball. Claims for future loss of income can be difficult to calculate with precision. No one knows, for sure, what the future will hold.

When valuing a claim for future loss on income, the court will have to consider whether your injuries will prevent you from being able to work for two months, two years or forever.

Calculating claims for future income loss usually requires us to retain the services of an actuary or an economist who are experts in calculating past and future income loss claims. These experts take into account factors like cost of living increases or raises that you would be entitled to receive during your career, the normal retirement age for persons of similar employment, the pension benefits you would expect to receive on retirement, and a host of other factors.

Diminished Earning Capacity:

In some cases, the evidence may prove that you, or your family member, will never be able to work. However, we may not be able to calculate exactly what that loss will be. For example, when a 3 ½ year old child suffers a severe brain injury, who is to say whether that child would have grown up to be a plumber, a doctor, or a rock star?

In cases where the exact amount of the future income loss is not certain, the court will consider awarding, compensation for what is called “diminished earning capacity”.

Everyone’s ability to work is an asset. In other words, your physical abilities, education, training and experience are all assets that provide you with the opportunity to earn an income. If any or all of those abilities have been limited or reduced to some extent by your injuries, you may be entitled to an award for diminished earning capacity.

Again this type of claim usually requires us to hire experts to calculate exactly how reduced your ability to work is and to what extent your ability to earn income has been diminished.

Continue reading "Income Loss in Medical Malpractice Claims" »

June 18, 2009

The Consumer’s Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims in Canada

The latest edition of my book, The Consumer’s Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims in Canada: Why 98% of Canadian Medical Malpractice Victims Never Get a Penny in Compensation, is now on its way back from the printers.

You can get a copy of the book by contacting me through this blog. However, I am going to be posting excerpts from the book over the next few weeks to give you a taste of the information contained in the book.

Lynn Butler sent me a very kind note after reading a copy of the book. Here is what she had to say:

“I found The Consumer’s Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims most helpful. I would definitely recommend the guide to anyone seeking information: it was very informative, factual and easy to read. I would certainly recommend the guide to anyone wondering if they have grounds for a medical malpractice lawsuit.”

Jeff Baggaley contacted me about a pediatric medical malpractice claim. After reading the book he sent me a note to say:

“I have read your book on pursuing a malpractice claim in Canada. Let me say at the outset that your book is an invaluable and excellently written introduction to essential information which the possible claimant needs to know.

As you say, it saved me a lot of time for I am able to read it, and re-read it, as time permits. I very much appreciate the service your book provides.”

If you think you or a family member may have been a victim of medical malpractice you can contact me through this blog for a free copy of my book or you can call me toll free at 1-877-423-2050.

May 28, 2009

How Do I Know if I Have a Medical Malpractice Claim?

When I am asked to review a possible claim for a client wondering if they have been a victim of medical malpractice, it often takes months of investigation and requires reviewing hundreds of pages of medical records and reports. In many cases I have to get a medical expert to provide a medical-legal opinion on the issue of standard of care or causation.

However, there is a way for you to figure out for yourself if you have medical malpractice claim that is worth talking to a lawyer about to see if you may have a claim.

Two Simple Questions:

There are two questions that you need to ask yourself. If there is a clear cut answer to both questions, then you may have a medical malpractice claim that is worth pursuing.

The first question you need to ask yourself is:

“What did my doctor (nurse or health care professional) do or fail to do that was careless?”
If there is no clear answer to this question, or if there was a series of problems or errors that led to your injury, or if you are not exactly sure what caused the problem that you are concerned about, your medical malpractice claim may be difficult to prove

The second question you need to ask yourself is:

“If the medical malpractice had not happened, how would things be different for me now and in the future?”

In order to be entitled to receive compensation you must be able to clearly establish that you suffered an injury as a result of your doctor’s (or health care provider) negligence. If your doctor was negligent, but you did not suffer any injury, then you probably don’t have a claim that is worth pursuing.

For example, if you received the wrong medication and spent months worrying about it, but suffered no ill effects, than you probably don’t have a claim that is worth pursuing.

In other words, unless you can clearly explain to a judge or a jury what the injury is and how it is going to affect your life then it might be difficult for you to receive enough compensation to make it worth the expense of a complex medical malpractice trial.

I go into more detail on these questions and a number of other issues that you need to be aware of in my book: The Consumers Guide to Medical Malpractice Claims in Canada: Why 98% of Canadian Medical Malpractice Victims Never Get a Penny in Compensation. You can get a free copy of the book by contacting me through this blog or by calling my office at (902) 423-2050.


March 4, 2009

Doctors Forcing Patients to Sign Gag Orders

Can you believe this?!

There are doctors who are forcing patients to sign a contract promising not to criticize the doctor, "his expertise and/or treatment."

No signature-No medical care

If the patients won’t sign the contract, the doctors won’t treat them.

I will ask again: Can you flippin’ believe this?!

Doctors don't like online reviews

The contracts are in response to websites that are springing up around the internet that allow patients to post reviews about their doctors. Doctors don’t like the fact that the websites allow patients to post negative comments, but doctors have no way to respond without breaching patient confidentiality.

Blackmail?

So they have resorted to blackmail. Sign the paper or don’t get medical care!

Can you believe this?!

Patients come to their doctors when they are sick, afraid and vulnerable. If you needed medical care and a doctor shoved a piece of paper in front of you and said: “Sign it or find another doctor” what would you do? I think most people would sign anything in order to get the medical care they need.

One of the websites doctors are concerned about is RateMDs.com. Co-founder John Swapceinski, said that in recent months, six doctors have asked him to remove negative online comments based on patients' signed waivers. He has refused.

"They're basically forcing the patients to choose between health care and their First Amendment rights, and I really find that repulsive," Swapceinski said.

I agree. It is repulsive…and I think it is also a violation of doctor’s fiduciary duty to their patients.

What about the Hippocratic Oath?

Perhaps the doctors that are using these contracts have forgotten their Hippocratic oath. When taking the oath, that deals with the ethical practice of medicine, doctors promise: “ To keep the good of the patient as the highest priority.”
Perhaps they need to add “…unless the patient complains about me.”

What Happened to Freedom of Speech?

Admittedly these types of online reviews are unscientific and subjective. But why shouldn’t patients have the right to express their opinions (as long as they aren’t slanderous)? Why shouldn’t people have the opportunity to hear what other patients have said about the specialist they have been referred to?

So what do you think?

As a public service here are some of the online doctor reviews that I could find:

Rate MD's

Doctor Reviews Online

My Doc Hub

Angies List

Related posts:

You Can File a Complaint About Your Doctor!

Continue reading "Doctors Forcing Patients to Sign Gag Orders" »

January 22, 2009

Simple Checklist Helps Prevent Deaths and Complications after Surgery

The New England Journal of Medicine has published a study showing that using a simple checklist helped decrease the number of surgery related deaths by more than 40%. The research showed that major complications after surgery fell by almost 1/3.

Using a Checklist

The checklist required the operating team to review a list of questions which included:

1. Were proper antibiotics given;
2. Was the correct patient on the operating table;
3. Was the correct surgical site identified;
4. Was sufficient anesthesia and blood supply available;
5. Did the patient have any allergies;
6. Counting needles/sponges to make sure nothing was left inside the patient.

Staggering Results

The results of the checklist were, to use the words of one of the researchers, “staggering”. Dr Bryce Taylor, a doctor at one of the Canadian hospitals that participated in the study, told The Globe and Mail:

“I would not undergo surgery, unless I knew the checklist was being done.”

Just Common Sense?

I think most of us would say that making sure you operate on the right patient is just common sense. Why do you need a checklist for that?

Unfortunately, common sense is something that is often lacking in our overburdened hospitals that are under staffed by overworked doctors and nurses.

Common sense sometimes gives way to:

“I thought he/she was responsible for that”.

An Example

Case in point, I’m representing a lady who had bowel surgery. After the surgery she complained for almost 2 years of excruciating pain. Her surgeon told her the pain was “normal” and that it would get better.

When the pain became worse her complaints were labeled as “attention seeking”. That is until her family doctor noticed a piece of surgical gauze sticking out of her surgical wound.

My client eventually had to have a second round of surgery to remove 4 feet of her bowel because 6 feet of surgical gauze had become embedded into her body.

The claim was made against the doctor that performed the surgery and the nurses that assisted the doctor in the O.R.

It's The Other Person's Fault!

The surgeon's defence: “I thought the nurses had counted all the surgical gauze”.

The nurses’ defence: “The doctor was responsible for ensuring that he took everything out of the patient before he closed her up”.

No matter how simple using a checklist may be, I applaud any effort that can so dramatically reduce post operative deaths or major surgical complications.

Now we just need a checklist to make sure everyone uses the checklist.


Continue reading "Simple Checklist Helps Prevent Deaths and Complications after Surgery " »

December 12, 2008

You Can File a Complaint About Your Doctor!

I get several calls a week from patients, of family members of patients, who are concerned about the care that they, or their family member, have received from their doctor or hospital.

In most cases, a careful investigation of the facts reveals that there are no grounds for a medical malpractice claim (in other words, the doctor or hospital wasn’t negligent) or that there may have been negligence in the patient’s care, but the cost of filing a lawsuit would be more than the potential recovery.

Explaining these facts to my clients is one of the more frustrating aspects of being a medical malpractice lawyer. I hate telling patients that I believe there was negligence in the care they received but that I don't think they should pursue a compensation claim.

My colleague Ches Crosbie has posted about this problem at the Newfoundland Injury Law Blog. Ches is one of Newfoundland and Labrador’s finest medical malpractice lawyers. He points out that the decision to accept or reject a client who has a medical malpractice claim is always difficult.

College of Physicians and Surgeons

However, if you are not satisfied with the care that you or your family has received, you can file a complaint with the College of Physicians and Surgeons. Each province has a College of Physicians and Surgeons that is made up of a panel of doctors and lay persons (non doctors) who are responsible for hearing complaints about doctor’s conduct and administering discipline.

Discipline can range from something as simple as giving the doctor a warning to as serious as suspending the doctor’s license or taking away the doctor’s license to practice medicine in that province.

File a Complaint About the Doctor!

I encourage patients and family members who are concerned about a doctor’s conduct to contact the College of Physicians and Surgeons to express their concerns. Often the patients don’t follow through with the complaint. I think this is a real mistake.

There are certain doctors who I regularly receive calls about. However, if the patients don’t file a complaint with the College of Physicians and Surgeons, there is no way for the College to know about any potential concerns about the doctor’s conduct.

When a patient finally files a complaint the College may not take the complaint seriously because it is the first complaint received about a particular doctor. The Board members' reasoning may be something like: “Well, we have only received one complaint about his/ her conduct. Lets give the doctor a warning to make sure it doesn’t happen again”.

On the other hand, if the College has received a half dozen or more complaints about the same doctor they will be far more likely to take the complaint seriously and more likely to administer more severe discipline to the doctor.

Ches gives some good advice about what type of information should be contained in a complaint to the College of Physicians and Surgeons. I would recommend anyone considering filing a complaint to take a look at his post.


Continue reading "You Can File a Complaint About Your Doctor!" »

July 11, 2008

Altered Medical Files: "I think my records have been tampered with!"

Altering medical records does not happen as often as it appears to happen on television or in the movies. However, it happens enough that experienced medical malpractice lawyers develop a sense of when further investigation into the legitimacy of a medical record or chart is warranted.

One of my favourite movies of all times is The Verdict with Paul Newman. I love the scene where he finally realizes that he can prove that the defendant doctor altered the medical files of the woman who was left in a coma because of the doctor’s negligence.

Lessons Learned From Past Cases:

Over the past 18 years, I have learned some lessons about when to suspect that a medical file may have been altered.

Notes on one report, not on another:

In one case I was involved in the specialist’s report that was received by my client’s family physician did not have (exculpatory) handwritten notes that appeared in the report in the specialist’s file.

Lesson:
Look for all copies of the record and compare them.

Different Versions of reports:

In one case the surgeon dictated three different versions of the operative report. The family doctor received the first version days after my client’s surgery. After my client’s condition deteriorated, he dictated a second version (which was found in the Hospital chart). After my client became comatose and was transferred to another hospital for corrective surgery he dictated a third version of the report which was in his office copy of my client’s chart.

Lesson:
Get the records, and get them fast.

Were they working?

In a claim involving allegations of nursing negligence, the nursing notes contained statements that the patient’s condition had been communicated to the attending physician. However the date of the entry was for a day that the nurse in question wasn’t working!

Lesson:
Compare staffing sheets/time cards with the medical chart to detect entries/notes by staff members that were not present/on duty that day.

Medication Errors:

Medication errors are a common mistake among nurses who are overworked or inexperienced.

In a claim involving a fatal overdose, the nursing notes indicated that the deceased had received the proper dosage of medication. However, the medication administration records, which were not supplied by the hospital when the chart was originally requested, showed that the medication had been administered to the patient twice.

Lesson:
Compare the medication administration records with the nursing notes and physicians orders.

Destroying Records:

In an anesthesia negligence claim the anesthesiologist tore up the original anesthesia record and prepared a new record with different data. One of the nurses involved in the operation retrieved the original record and scotch taped it together.

Lesson:
Interview everyone, including retired employees.

White out = Suspicious Records

In a birth injury claim two of the babies APGAR scores had been whited out and changed from a 0 to a 2 (normal).

Change the Numbers - Change the Result:

In a fatality claim the deceased’s blood pressure reading had been changed from 170/90 to 120/80 by using a different colour pen to alter the numbers 7 and 9. The change couldn’t been seen on the photocopy of the patient’s chart, but was reasonably obvious on examination of the original chart.

Lesson:
Whenever I have a reasonable suspicion that the medical files have been altered, I make an appointment to attend at the Hospital or the doctor’s office to view the original chart.

What to Look For:

Some “red flags” that I look for, based on past experience, that may indicate the possibility of altered medical records are:

• Crowding or squeezing entries above a signature, or between lines;
• Erasures, crossed out entries or white-out corrections;
• Changes in slant of handwriting;
• Using different pens or computer typeface to write one entry;
• Notes on different dates in the same colour ink from same pen;
• Notes in different colour ink (different pen) in the same chart note;
• A typed entry following handwritten entries, or vice versa;
• Missing original records that have replaced by photocopies;
• Entries that are self-serving;
• Half sheets instead of the standard size page (page cut in half);
• Additional notes on the original document, not on copies received by client;
• An unusually late date of dictation of a consult report;
• Any handwritten entry made by someone who erred significantly in treatment.


Continue reading "Altered Medical Files: "I think my records have been tampered with!"" »

June 4, 2008

No "Wrongful Life" in Canada: Supreme Court

In Canada there is no such thing as a claim for "wrongful life". In a ruling released last week, the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal a Court of Appeal decision that confirmed that Canadian law does not recognize the tort of "wrongful life" as a legitimate cause of action.

In Hergott, et al. v. Bovingdon the defendant doctor prescribed a fertility drug for the plaintiff mother. The doctor did not explain the risks of taking the drug to the mother.

The drug caused the mom to become pregnant with twins. Unfortunately, the twin pregnancy caused a premature birth, and the premature birth caused the twins to be born with severe disabilities.

At trial the jury found that the doctor was negligent in failing to explain the risks of the drug to the mother. In other words, the mom did not provide her "informed consent" to take the drug.

The trial judge also ruled that the doctor owed a duty of care to the twins, which entitled them to recover damages for their injuries. The judge awarded compensation to the parents for the cost of having to care for their severely disabled children after they reached the age of 18.

The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that twins' claims were "wrongful life" claims, and therefore barred by Canadian law.

The Supreme Court of Canada denied leave (permission) to appeal the decision.

What does it mean?

The Supreme Court has essentially upheld the status quo on the type of claims that can be brought to court. The decision arguably has opened the door to the amount of damages that can be claimed in serious injury cases.

As the law stands now there are three types of claims that typically arise out of catastrophic birth injury cases.

Wrongful Life:

These claims are typically brought where a medical procedure for sterilization or abortion fails and a child is born as a result. Or, as in the Hergott v. Bovington cases, where a child is born with a severe disability as a result of negligence. The claim is typically brought by the child claiming compensation for the harm caused by their birth. In Canada, these types of claims have usually not succeeded. The courts have stated that a claimant cannot claim to have suffered harm as a result of their birth. In other words, the courts assume that it is better to be alive than never to have been born. The Supreme Court of Canada's decision not to hear the twins appeal in the Bovington case confirms that this remains the state of the law in Canada.

Wrongful Birth:

These types of claims are typically brought by parents of children that have been born with an injury. Typically the injury is the result of post-conception negligence by a doctor. For example where a child is born with Erbs Palsy, stretch injury to the brachial plexus that happens during a baby's delivery. These types of claims have generally succeeded.

Wrongful Pregnancy:

These types of claims are brought by parents on behalf of children. The claims typically involve an allegation of negligence resulting in an unplanned pregnancy due to a failed sterilization procedure. For example see the recent decision from New Brunswick where a mom was awarded $90,000.00 after she had a child as a result of a failed tubal ligation.

Expanding Recoverable Damages?

Less attention has been paid to the issue of the parents claim for the cost of caring for the twins after they reached the age of majority. The doctors lawyers argued that the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Krangle v. Brisco means that the defendant does not have to pay for the cost of a disabled child once the parent is not legally obliged to care for the child.

The Ontario Court of Appeal emphatically rejected this argument.

The trial judge rejected the appellant’s submission that Krangle stands for the proposition that the absence of a legal obligation on the parents to support the children after age eighteen is a bar to recovery. I agree with the trial judge. In Krangle, the child was not going to be supported by the parents once he was an adult. Therefore, they would not be incurring that cost. This was not because they were not entitled to incur the cost had they wished but because the group home was in the child’s best interest. The issue in that case was whether the parents would be obliged to reimburse the state for the cost of the child’s care, which turned on their legal obligation to provide support. If they had been responsible to reimburse the state, they would be seen as likely to incur the cost of future care and the court would have awarded damages to cover this cost.

I have represented parents whose children have suffered catastrophic injuries. In many cases the parents are overwhelmed by the costs and pressures of caring for a severely disabled child. As a result, their future care plan often involves placing the children in provincially funded care or group homes after the child reaches the age of majority.

The Bovington decision means that parents can make a claim for the extraordinary costs of caring for a disabled child, once they become an adult.

As the Court of Appeal put it:

A group home could only provide for their physical care but not their emotional well-being. Nor would the group home be able to give them intellectual stimulation and pleasure.

So there you have it. The Supreme Court holds the line on wrongful life but clears the way for claims for the costs of caring for a disabled adult child so that they can continue to receive the love and emotional support that only a parent can provide.

Continue reading "No "Wrongful Life" in Canada: Supreme Court" »

Bookmark and Share

February 3, 2008

Medical Malpractice Claim Over Birth Injuries Dismissed

An obstetrician's failure to obtain informed consent was not the legal cause of an infant's brain damage, according to a decision from Ontario.

The Ontario Court of Appeal just released a ruling upholding a trial decision dismissing a claim of obstetric malpractice.

In Cruz v. Robins the trial judge held that the use of forceps during the infant plaintiff's delivery caused the baby's brachial plexis injury and brain damage. The judge found that the parents, Mr. and Mrs. Cruz should have been consulted and should have been informed of the option of a caesarean section and its risks. Further, he found that they should have been advised of the risks involved in proceeding with a mid-forceps delivery. Nevertheless, the trial judge concluded that had the appellants been advised and given the choice, the same result would have occurred.

In other words, even if the parents had known the risk, they would have agreed to assume the risk.

Even though the plaintiff's were able to prove that the defendant doctor was negligent in failing to obtain proper informed consent, they were not able to prove that the failure would have changed the outcome of the delivery. The Court of Appeal repeated the words of the trial judge who said:

[Dr. Robins’] failure to seek and obtain informed consent is of no consequence to the outcome of this case. The same procedure would have been pursued and the same results would have been experienced.

The decision highlights the huge hurdles plaintiff's face in medical malpractice claims and why 98% of Canadian victims of medical malpractice never recevieve compensation for their injuries.

Continue reading "Medical Malpractice Claim Over Birth Injuries Dismissed" »

Bookmark and Share