$500,000 Awarded After Doctors Mock Patient During Surgery
Source: patch.com
The patient had intended to record his doctor’s instructions after the procedure, ensuring nothing got lost in translation when he awoke from sedation. Instead, he inadvertently recorded the entire procedure, and it didn’t take long after he fell unconscious for the anesthesiologist, Tiffany M. Ingham, 42, to begin the ridicule.
The Washington Post reported the anesthesiologist and other medical professionals in the room made jokes at the patient’s expense and even placed a false diagnosis on his chart during the procedure.
Here are a few samplings from the man’s recording, via the Post.
“After five minutes of talking to you in pre-op,” the anesthesiologist told the sedated patient, “I wanted to punch you in the face and man you up a little bit,” she was recorded saying.
When a medical assistant noted the man had a rash, the anesthesiologist warned her not to touch it, saying she might get “some syphilis on your arm or something,” then added, “It’s probably tuberculosis in the penis, so you’ll be all right.”
When the assistant noted that the man reported getting queasy when watching a needle placed in his arm, the anesthesiologist remarked on the recording, “Well, why are you looking then, retard?”
----
After a three-day trial, a Fairfax County judge ordered the anesthesiologist and her practice to pay the man a sum of $500,000: $100,000 for defamation, $200,000 for medical malpractice and another $200,000 for punitive damages.
Read more: http://patch.com/california/redlands/s/f29zf/500-000-awarded-after-doctors-mock-patient-during-surgery
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Doc..... 
roody
(10,849 posts)
SmittynMo
(3,544 posts)sneak in a recording device into surgery?
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)which seems like an odd set-up to me.
But the man’s phone, in his pants, was placed beneath him under the operating table and inadvertently recorded the audio of the entire procedure, court records show. The doctors’ attorneys argued that the recording was illegal, but the man’s attorneys noted that Virginia is a “one-party consent” state, meaning that only one person involved in a conversation need agree to the recording.
....
Ingham then mocked the man for attending Mary Washington College, once an all-women’s school, and wondered aloud whether her patient was gay, the suit states. Then the anesthesiologist said, “I’m going to mark ‘hemorrhoids’ even though we don’t see them and probably won’t,” and did write a diagnosis of hemorrhoids on the man’s chart, which the lawsuit said was a falsification of medical records.
After declaring the patient a “big wimp,” Ingham reportedly said: “People are into their medical problems. They need to have medical problems.”
Shah replied, “I call it the Northern Virginia syndrome,” according to the suit.
....
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,453 posts)It's not like they change you from bed to bed. They wheel you in and out on the same bed. It would be easy to leave a phone tucked in your gown or on the bed.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)Plenty of time to stick a recorder in the table
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,453 posts)Maybe some plan to avoid lockers etc. Maybe the patient gets to keep control of their belongings on their cart.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)They then roll the gurney into the OR and do the procedure while you are still on the gurney. When finished they roll you back to the prep/recovery area. It is all quite efficient and pleasant. The fentanyl is quite nice. If it weren't for that horrible crap you have to drink about a gallon of I would have it done every 6 months.
LeftOfWest
(482 posts)Why?
madaboutharry
(42,032 posts)She was probably always a bully.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Doctors are human too and it is not hurtful unless they said it to the patient's face. In this case, the patient brought it upon himself by surreptitiously recording something he shouldn't have without disclosure.
Heck, I can't even record a telephone call without making the other party aware that I am recording it -- why should this be diferent?
marble falls
(71,730 posts)
onecent
(6,096 posts)but they NEED to be respectful just like everyone else....
When did you TRY recording a phone call without the other party knowing????
har har
KT2000
(22,124 posts)he brought it on himself??
The embarrassment the doctors are feeling now has been brought on by their actions.
Gee - highly paid professionals who enjoy extra perks in our society feel entitled to ridicule patients? If this is the norm then treatments and surgery where the patient is unconscious should be taped and filmed.
So the unconscious women who have been raped have no room to complain because it didn't happen when they were awake - or if it was taped, she brought it on herself because it was not her right to be taping.
As I see it we all have a greater responsibility toward people who are unconscious - they are totally vulnerable. And that makes these doctors' actions reprehensible.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Geez!
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)An anesthesiologist is getting paid $3,000+ for two hours work and it is too much to expect them not to ridicule an unconscious person totally at their mercy?
Hekate
(100,133 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)That is a bit rich
KT2000
(22,124 posts)but the rationale for the behavior is the same. "I can do what I want because they don't know I am doing it"
This is not about poor taste, it is about humiliating a patient.
treestar
(82,383 posts)someone is unconscious.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)The hemorrhoids note in the chart is BAD. Shittalking, not so much.
Joe Chi Minh
(15,229 posts)had evidently encouraged the team around her to express the same insulting mindset. A cavalier attitude and professionalism would be a somewhat oxymoronic combination - and sure enough our friend actually was so proactively unprofessionally, arguably criminally unprofessional, as to deliberately falsify the patient's medical record.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)I would not want them operating on me. They don't care about the patients at all!
Geez, hard to believe anyone would condone this.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Really?
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)The patient didn't bring anything on himself. Get a clue.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)and I am sure there are a lot of unflattering remarks. I am safe from them because I don't know and care very little.
Now, if I wiretapped my colleagues' and acquaintances phones and discovered that they were having fun at my expense, I brought it upon myself. It is that simple.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)That all surgical procedures are recorded and are made part of the patient's record.
still_one
(98,883 posts)making fun of patients.
That is a pretty offensive post, which has nothing to do with the actual issue involved. Maybe you should get a clue also
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)They are jerks and idiots then.
OK to make fun of a person WHO IS PAYING YOU as long as it is not to their face?
Shirley you jest.
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)that this kind of talk was nothing like the "gallows humor" of the ER or a trauma center. She called it "bullying" of a defenseless patient during a routine colonoscopy - there is no need for the medical staff to "blow off steam" or "ease the tension." And then there was the deliberate entry of false information into the medical chart - completely inappropriate under any circumstances and possible grounds for losing a medical license.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)
Liberty Belle
(9,705 posts)And encourages the other docs and medical professionals to engage in chlidish ridicule instead of showing respect.
just like we have laws to make cops wear body cameras, maybe we need laws to make all operating rooms audiotape proceedings.
Joe Chi Minh
(15,229 posts)or any responsible job.
peace13
(11,076 posts)Your phone calls have nothing to do with the legality of this. Two, you do not know what a patient may retain in the subconscious during surgery. Three, doctors hold lives in their hands and when they are permitted to judge and mock their victims ...err ...patients I wonder how it can not help but affect the treatment/ care that they give.
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)colleagues are defending her actions. It was not just what she said - bad enough and very unprofessional - not anything like the "gallows humor" of an ER or an ICU - this was a routine colonoscopy. The doctors were not under any pressure, etc. This particular doctor just did not like the patient and decided to make fun of the patient in an unprofessional and personal way - cracked jokes about his genital rash - called it syphilis and "penis TB" etc. Then she went even further and entered false information into the chart - that the patient had hemorrhoids, which he did not. Sorry but doctors don't get to use the medical chart as a joke book. That is actually grounds for losing your medical license. As far as saying it to the patient's face - any anesthesiologist should know that you cannot be sure what a patient will hear or what they will not hear. People have different levels of "wakefulness" even under general anesthesia. In fact, one of the jobs of the anesthesiologist is to monitor closely the level of wakefulness of the patient, as well as vital signs - which it is hard to see how she does that when she is so busy cracking jokes. This doctor also showed a lot of disrespect for her colleagues. Not everyone on a surgical team needs or wants to hear that kind of sophomoric nonsense. It could be considered a hostile work environment for someone who was offended but didn't feel empowered to speak up. You would hope that when someone is told, "you might get syphilis on your arm or something" they would have the nerve to say quietly, "I don't think that is appropriate. Please stop." But some places still have a "The doctor is god." mentality and that could be a recipe for having the hostility directed toward the person objecting. Both my daughters and my wife are in medicine. I have heard the stories. A doctor who is a jerk is more of a problem for the other staff than for the patients. As for the recording, the patient testified he merely wanted to make sure he got any instructions which the medical staff might give him while in a groggy state.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Guess you didn't read the brief, the complaint and decision. It's ok... you're human too.
Horse with no Name
(34,232 posts)Doctors will talk about their difficult patients but never while they in such a vulnerable position.
One of the reasons that I will not go to doctors that I work with. I don't want to know that they hate their jobs and/or their patients.
Dorian Gray
(13,850 posts)the doctor was a total ass. Deserves to be caught and fined.
Good.
Doctors should not treat patients like this. It's obnoxious and cruel. Not to their faces and not behind their backs.
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)still_one
(98,883 posts)that trust. They entrust the physician to do what is in their best welfare, and not make fun of them. Whether it is behind their back or in person, the incident did NOT take place in their private residence, but in a public medical facility, with other people present.
The view that "it is not hurtful unless it is said to the patient's face" is not a valid argument. For one thing the comments were said in the presence of other people. For another thing, they most likely administered Versed or some other product which can induce temporary amnesia. Putting a patient in that state, and then making disparaging remarks about that patient is against medical ethics.
I would go as far to say at the minimum they should be reprimanded by the appropriate medical authority.
The argument that they were illegally recorded is countered since there are witnesses to the abuse, and yes, I refer to it as abuse, and lack of respect for their patient.
sendero
(28,552 posts).... you are comic. One extra letter makes you bogus.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and stay healthy so as not to have to deal with people like this. i worked in a hospital years ago, and the drs would sometimes make fun of their patients. i know you gotta blow off steam from a stressful job, but making fun of an old lady who is having pain during a procedure? that's just messed up.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)I am betting the man knew in advance that he ws going to sue. And that he made sure to do things that would get the docs and nurses to crack jokes. I have been in many ORs and this is very, very common.
Person 2713
(3,263 posts)KT2000
(22,124 posts)then those "professionals" need to learn to behave themselves. An unconscious person is vulnerable and they exhibited abusive behavior for their own enjoyment. I know lots of docs are full of themselves but that does not give them special rights to be asses.That kind of behavior should not be tolerated.
As I said up-thread - a woman who is unconscious and is raped should not have any complaints about that because she didn't know what was going on. Yes, there is a difference in degree of abuse but the rationale for getting away with it is the same.
I doubt this man knew in advance - he was humiliated by what was said about him. The bullies here are the loser doctors.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Please tell me you are being sarcastic. If not, please tell me you are not currently working in the OR participating in this type of behaviour.
CrawlingChaos
(1,893 posts)I'm sure it is common; it's also completely fucked up. A patient having a surgical procedure is in a uniquely vulnerable position and this outrageous lack of respect is beyond unacceptable. Do you realize this POS doctor also added a false diagnosis of hemorrhoids to the man's chart out of sheer maliciousness? And his big crime was being afraid of the needle, as many people are.
This kind of grossly unprofessional behavior will also contribute to the reluctance people feel to submit themselves to vital, potentially life-saving procedures. It's fucked up on every level.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)and you purport to be a doctor?!
Or maybe you just play one on DU. I certainly hope that's the case and you aren't anywhere near patients or their records.
Mr.Bill
(24,906 posts)That's what this is about.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)certainly not common. She also falsified his report. Excuse me - I would not want you near me.
brett_jv
(1,245 posts)Right?
This is a joke, right?
Literally has to be ...
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)Was that common in the OR where you worked also?
treestar
(82,383 posts)I can see fraud in minor auto accidents or slip and falls happening, but this would be too much trouble. And too unlikely to have a result. Maybe the patient realized these people were not very professional.
Also seems like it was an accident that he got the recording.
wendylaroux
(2,925 posts)smug pos dr.
Triana
(22,666 posts)Whoever posted it messed it up. Pretty sad.
it's not important anyway. Moral of the story is: don't say anything around a sedated patient that you would not say to his/her face.
MuseRider
(35,176 posts)working in surgery as a student I could have busted all the most well thought of surgeons with crap like this.
Patient out, poking belly talking about fatty here and fatty there.
Look at this guys ass, suppose he sticks baseball bats up there?
I will not even speak of what happened to good looking young women, mostly from the OBGYN doing the surgery.
This was 30+ years ago. I have no idea what it is like now but the surgery was the surgeons kingdom and they used it like that.
EDIT to add, because I realized I did not say this before, these people are assholes and beneath what their title allows them in the world. This should never happen. After I experienced this I spent so little time going to doctors I almost died. I do not, to this day, trust them at all. No one under any circumstances should be treated this way and to do it when the patient can't even defend themselves and are trusting you to take care of them? Reprehensible. I would say they should lose their license for it. Disgusting abuse of patient trust.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I recently had the first surgery of my life, and I now fervently wish I'd agitated to have my husband in the OR. People who have no one? I hate to think.
Alkene
(752 posts)of how some health care professionals view the public.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Was it very professional for them to be mocking him while unconscious? No.
Was it harming anyone? No.
Was it defamatory? How??? How could his reputation possibly be damaged (unless of course HE publicized the recordings which, oops, he did, but that was his decision.)
And if smack talking some patient that gets on your nerves *when they can't hear you* is "medical malpractice" we better just shut down the entire medical profession.
So how the fuck did they come up with half a million dollars in *damages* without there being any actual damages?
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Yes, it is harming society to have medical "professionals" who apparently think this is OK.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Did they mess up the surgery? Were they abusive to his face? Did they withold or otherwise compromise his treatment?
If you were held legally and financially culpable for any unpleasant thing you said about another person *in private to your colleagues when that person could not hear you* how many people in the country do you think would have been driven into bankruptcy from paying the "damages" by now?
This is idiotic.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Is in the room, helpless, depending on them as professionals, and PAYING THEM. It is the last that bugs me the most.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Which as far as I can see they did. With no complaints about the work.
Nothing he was depending on them to do was in any way compromised. And it is absurd to attempt to claim there was half a million dollars in damages required because they said mean things about him *in confidence* and he happened to spy on them doing it (inadvertent or not).
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)When he is in the room. AND PAYING THEM.
Sounds like a frat house to me. Certainly doesn't sound professional. Sounds like a bunch of jerks. Skilled jerks, but jerks nonetheless.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)He couldn't hear them. That's the relevant point
And he got *exactly* what he paid for.
You haven't provided anything remotely resembling a justification for this absurd damages award. Someone being offended by a private conversation they spied on doesn't qualify.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)In other words, people are entitled to make fun of you when you are in the room but unconscious, AND YOU ARE PAYING THEM.
I don't know if there is really a legal case, but on a practical level I feel entitled to respectful treatment from people I am paying for a service.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)How can you possibly not comprehend that? It's called freedom of expression.
Response to gcomeau (Reply #66)
Marty McGraw This message was self-deleted by its author.
peace13
(11,076 posts)Imagine being sedated and hearing these comments. It happens. It could have an impact on the outcome for the patient.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)And to get them drummed out of their profession if it was within my power.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)In what professions you feel people have complete freedom of expression ON THE JOB. Actually, no, I wouldn't particularly care, now that I think of it.
olddots
(10,237 posts)N.T.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)roody
(10,849 posts)And courteous at my job. Is that weird?
But not doing so when none of your customers can see or hear you and letting off some steam to your co-workers would not constitute an action for which it could be argued you had somehow inflicted half a million dollars of damages on someone.
peace13
(11,076 posts)You may not be a doctor but you play one on DU. It is good that someone can stick up for the helpless surgical staff!
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)... was that some kind of rebuttal to the point being made in your mind?
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)It she comes to a routine colonoscopy needing to "let off steam" she needed to step aside and let someone else do the procedure. This was not the ER or the trauma center or the ICU. This was routine ambulatory surgery. Drama is not called for. And deliberately falsifying a medical report as a joke is not covered under "letting off steam" sorry. I suspect that is what motivated the jury more than anything else. This woman was out of control and should not be practicing medicine - at least until she undergoes some therapy to help her understand why she thinks it is okay to bully a defenseless patient.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Perhaps the patient was a complete and total jackass to them before the procedure? And they kept things nice and patient and professional in their interactions but once he was out they vented to their coworkers.
And deliberately falsifying a medical report as a joke is not covered under "letting off steam" sorry.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141127573#post67
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)I heard a discussion about this by a medical ethics specialist. She said that if in fact a patient is uncooperative, inappropriate, etc., the proper way to deal with it is right away - let the patient know they are being inappropriate or whatever. She said you do not wait until the patient is essentially defenseless and then take out your frustrations on him. She called it bullying by the doctor. She also said this case cannot be compared to the "gallows humor" of the ER or trauma center or ICU. A routine ambulatory surgery is a different situation entirely. Not sure why you see the need to defend this person. None of her professional colleagues do. The place where she worked doesn't.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Say you have some lawyers make fun of a difficult client after hours. That's unprofessional. But at least the person is not there, unconscious, while they are doing the work.
In fact, if the guy bothered her so much, the lady should have recused herself from the procedure. Anyone who finds they just can't stand their client or customer really should refer them elsewhere. It's professionalism.
onenote
(46,125 posts)you need a law school refresher class in torts.
KT2000
(22,124 posts)Because the man learned what was said about him and what was erroneously written in the record - he was humiliated.
Most people value their dignity and he was within his rights to get it back as best he could. Now we all know that this kind of behavior is OK with the medical establishment.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...on a conversation they were having in confidence and didn't like what they said.
If that qualifies as inflicting harm for which a person is legally culpable we're all screwed.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)When he was in the room? Give me a break.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)You don't find any harm or defamation in that? He could have received treatment for a condition he didn't even have.
Thank goodness the jury wasn't made up of some of the people in this thread. And the ones I am referring to really should watch themselves at work too since it seems they are implying that they witness and/or participate in the same behaviors.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...was that that was part of the general joking around occuring in the OR and not something retained in his records afterwards.
If I'm wrong about that that would be the one aspect of this story that actually entitled him to damages. But the article only mentions it in the one throwaway sentence and never provides details. It instead spends the entire article talking about how they said mean things. (Which is one reason why I question if it was put on his permanent paperwork since if it had been that would have been the serious part of this story to actually be writing about.)
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Why would you doubt that? It is almost certainly the basis for the $200,000 award for malpractice. It wasn't a legal brief. Articles in the popular press (and a local Patch is barely above an amateur blog) are written for sensationalism. The voyeuristic aspect of mean things said grabs far more eyes than legal details.
Maybe a more serious write up, not done for the purpose you attracting reader's attention might convince you of how wrong you are. http://www.scribd.com/doc/269588961/AesthesiologistComplaint-Filed If reading is not your thing skip to statements 52, 137, and 138.
Does a person have to be present and conscious, in your opinion, for defamation to occur? The definitions I find are along the lines of "the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation." which do not qualify that the person be present and aware. A person's reputation can be ruined without without the person ever hearing/reading the damaging false statements. I take you would not mind if someone started people you had syphilis and ebola? Since you never heard the words, you would be fine with that, correct?
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)I do not doubt that. I said the article was unclear if that was talking about them goofing around with his chart during the procedure then removing the false information, or if they left it on the chart afterwards.
If the former, I don;t care. If the latter THEN there would be legitimate grounds for damages. But that would be the ONLY aspect of this that was relevant and the article spent the entire time except one sentence talking about how they said mean things.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)So you admit you are wrong on the false diagnosis. Good, one thing settled.
Your belief that defamation against a person requires the person to be present and conscious is proved to be wrong by the judgement against the defendant by this case and others.
Your disapproval is noted and worth $0.00. The judge and jury's opinion was worth $100,000.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)"So you admit you are wrong on the false diagnosis. Good, one thing settled. "
Since I had already mentioned the diagnosis in the post you were originally replying to, if it makes you feel better to say that I'm now "admitting I was wrong" you feel free to entertain yourself that way.
"Your belief that defamation against a person requires the person to be present and conscious"
No, that is not what I said. Please read further up this exchange. What defamation requires is that a person's REPUTATION BE DAMAGED. Any comments made in private conversation and not released to the public cannot damage your reputation.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Good to know. I'll just have to do it in private conversation and then there's no way that your reputation can be damaged.
Makes perfect sense. 
And again, the court outweighs your opinion on this case $100,000 to $0.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Or people as in your wife or some guy you work with who I don't know and will never hear about (unless I have your workplace or home bugged for some reason) and, btw, you're saying it in a clearly joking manner just because you're pissed off about something I did or said and they know that and know it isn't true?
The former, broadcasting that information TO THE PUBLIC, is defamation.
The latter (which is what we're talking about here) how could I possibly give a shit about and why would you think I would?
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)End of they day, there is your opinion, worth $0, and the judge and jury's which says you are wrong, worth $100,000.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)In that latter case there is zero reason for me to care. Glad you finally appear to have grasped the point.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)and have worked so hard to prove that.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Agree with me then declare I'm wrong. Cute. Have fun playing.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)The plaintiff was awarded 100,000 reasons why you are wrong. The facts are not on your side.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Saying that you don't care if I were to tell people that you have syphilis is not agreeing with you.
Try and twist and turn, the case says you are wrong on what defamation is.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...you said I had no reason to care because there was no harm as long as that telling was not public but rather just you privately ranting to blow off steam to some personal acquaintance.
And if all you can keep repeating is that the court findings on the case are different than my opinion then perhaps you're having difficulty grasping the idea behind me saying such a court finding was stupid (unless the chart alteration was permanent). FYI, that means I already know what the court said. So you can stop trying to fill me in as if I didn't know.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)is a fact of your position. Agreeing that you hold that opinion is not agreeing with your point. Maybe you are reading what you would like to believe into my words?
I keep repeating the court findings since you appear to make them go away. My guess is that you don't like a judge and jury finding your opinion wrong. it would have been easy to dismiss on a Patch.com poorly written article, but something has forced you to double and triple and quadruple down on an incorrect fact.
Defamation can occur even if the defamed person is never aware of the damaging words. Sorry that you have trouble with that fact but that would be your problem.
Have a nice life.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)onenote
(46,125 posts)A statement can constitute actionable defamation if it is made to even a single person in a private communication. It does not have to be "to the general public" or made "publicly." Generally, how widespread the dissemination of a defamatory statement is goes to the amount of liability, not to culpability itself.
And unless the defamatory statements were privileged -- and they were not -- there is no expectation of privacy. If someone writes a "private" letter to another person that defames you and you ultimately learn of the letter -- maybe you find it, maybe you're told about it -- doesn't matter -- the harm doesn't come from you being "offended" -- it comes from your reputation being harmed by statements about you to another. Finding it isn't what creates the action, it is what makes it possible for you to pursue a remedy.
Really all first year law school stuff.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)"A statement can constitute actionable defamation if it is made to even a single person in a private communication."
Yeah... if the individual in question was, say, my boss.
Or one of my clients.
Or a potential employer.
Or ANYONE ELSE to whom my reputation has some form of relevance.
But ranting about me to your wife I've never even met and have no intention of ever meeting? No.
To some random guy you work with that I don't know, doesn't know me, and who has no relevance to or influence over any aspect of my life in any way that what is being said would impact? ESPECIALLY if it is goddamn obvious that the statements being made are intentionally hyperbolic ranting to blow off steam and not a real attempt to convince the person of false information about me?
NO. Not defamation.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Your classifications of the third party do not exist in actual law. There are no exemptions for spouses or some random guy that you work with. There are no exemptions for hyperbolic ranting.
There are exemptions for privileged speech such as testimony during a trial or lawmakers speech in legislative chambers. Jabber in an operating room is not privileged speech.
You may as well argue that water at 75 degrees F and 14.7 lbs. per square inch air pressure isn't wet.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)... that this entire discussion is about that award? So I already know they gave it. So you don't have to tell me they did a dozen times? That the whole fucking reason this thread exists is that award?
Or do you just have some kind of OCD that makes you keep saying it pointlessly?
And yes the exemptions I listed DO exist in law. Because defamation law specifically requires you show *injury*. Not just that someone said something mean about you to someone else.
Since there is no possible way I could show injury from you having a private rant with your wife I don't know I would (or rather should if the jury is doing it's job right) lose any attempt to sue you for defamation over it if I somehow found out about it.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)Your opinion is wrong. The award proves it.
The exemptions you claim do not exist. You claim that one's wife, and some random person are exemptions, but that is not the law. One does have to show injury, but that is an entirely different concept than one's wife and "some random guy" being an exemption.
Beyond that, this was a conversation between doctors, not spouses, injury was demonstrated to the court's satisfaction and your rants are proven wrong. Keep trying to swim up Niagra Falls, there's no law against going that way that and it's quite humorous.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Juries. Can. Be. Wrong.
This entire fucking discussion is about whether the jury was right or wrong in their decision.
Since you still seem to be incapable of understanding this and post after post just keep basically saying "the jury said this so it's right!" there's no point continuing banging my head against this particular wall with you.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)You ARE wrong. Of course juries CAN be wrong, but you ARE wrong.
No amount of shouting your opinion is going to change the law.
Since you seem incapable of understanding that you are wrong. maybe it is time that you stop banging your head.
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)I am not sure how that becomes a "throwaway sentence." If it was part of the legal brief and it did not actually happen, then the defense should have argued that it was not actually part of the medical record. There is no indication that they made that argument. In fact, the largest award was for "medical malpractice." Making snarky comments is not "medical malpractice." Falsifying a chart is.
The jury awarded the man $100,000 for defamation - $50,000 each for the comments about the man having syphilis and tuberculosis - and $200,000 for medical malpractice, as well as the $200,000 in punitive damages.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Maybe you are; I wouldn't know.
Me, I try to keep my communications on the job professional.
840high
(17,196 posts)yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)Said he had hemorrhoids when he did not. Ha. Ha. Such a joker. NO Harm, no foul, right?
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Another poster who failed to read the complaint and the decision. It's ok-- your failure to do so is not harming anyone.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)then they are likely to be careless. And putting false information is a patient chart could be harmful.
DonCoquixote
(13,954 posts)If it made a climate where the patient was disrespected enough to get a false diagnosis for their convenience and ego, yes it does!
DonCoquixote
(13,954 posts)I lot of the people who say no harm done are the same people who think doctors were maligned back when the public option was being discussed.
The fact is, our for profit medical system encourages narcissists and assholes to apply. Granted, the mistreatment they get as interns almost ensures that even the nice ones will want their share of the plunder once they make it, but the fact is, we treat doctors like Gods, and they are willing to play the part.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Performing and monitoring surgery is an extremely stressful activity. The doctors and nurses can do very little to lighten up the mood other than crack jokes in the sterile environment. It is never meant as a disrespect to the anesthetized patient and many a time, his/her surgery goes better because the doctors and nurses are relaxed.
It is extremely common. It is not like the doctors can play a bit of candy crush saga in the middle of surgery.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Edited to add that I don't give a $@#! how it was "meant." People who "relieve stress" like that are not people I want around me, much less operating on me.
KT2000
(22,124 posts)but it is bullshit.
Never meant as disrespect? read the article.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)I think it is boorish and indicative of a personality disorder.
peace13
(11,076 posts)Think about how the surgeon comes out after the surgery to talk to the patients family. The family is all 'thank you doctor' and treating her/him with such respect when minutes before this person was disrespecting the family member in a helpless state. I don't get where this humor is funny and relaxing.
Trust me, this behavior does not stop with unconscious patients. I have been poked and prodded by rude doctors in the examination room. I have left the doctors office feeling the judgment of a doctor that was completely rude and out of line. This is not some cleverly concealed behavior that is to be accepted from the Almighty surgeon and staff. This is rude , pompous behavior that is a form of bullying at the highest level.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And how stressful is a routine colonoscopy? It's not always stressful - it could be quite routine. None of what they said was funny and the false diagnosis was wrong.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)I've read the entire article and I don't understand what damages could be claimed. The patient can claim he was offended but being offended does not equal a valid legal claim for restitution, otherwise people would be suing all the time for everything. And I'm not understanding how defamation applies since the patient remains anonymous and thus there was no damage to the patient's reputation.
Not defending any of their actions, just trying to figure out how this works legally.
Glad to hear at least some of the medical practitioners are no longer there though, what trash.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)There is a difference between legality and propriety.
In a rational world, they would be booted for breach of medical ethics. Or at least breach of medical proper conduct.
Anybody who would defend this would defend bullying and hazing, IMHO.
There is ZERO congruence between this and bullying or hazing. Bullying and hazing are specifically intended to inflect trauma on the subject. Saying mean things about someone in *confidence* when they will never hear about it (unless they spy on you) is avoiding inflicting trauma on them.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)When he was in the room? And I don't regard recording that as spying. I have come to the opinion from this thread that surgical procedures should be recorded and made part of the patient's record.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...you don't understand the definition of the word confidence?
Yes. In confidence. It was under circumstances that (absent surreptitiously having their private conversation spied upon) therremarks were private.
So. In. Confidence.
(And I really don't care whether you think of it as being spied on. Call it having their conversation monitored without their knowledge if you like. The end result is the same.)
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)People in situations such as this think of anything they say ON THE JOB as actually or potentially part of the patient's record. And I still say they sound like a bunch of jerks. Hope I have better luck with my doctors.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I've come to wonder what *you* do on the job. Wait, wait, no, don't tell me. I don't really want to know; I just hope I'm not unknowingly dealing with you or others with the same views. I try not to.
Hassin Bin Sober
(27,453 posts)Wouldn't defamation be the part when the doc says the patient had syphilis?
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)To top it all off, it appears that the guy doing the colonoscopy did not follow all of the proper protocols, according to the doctor who did the follow up. Maybe he was distracted by the "jokes" by the anesthesiologist? If I had been on that jury I think I would have voted to add another zero to the award.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)If that describes business as usual, I'm going to have to reconsider my views on what I currently describe as woo medicine.
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)Read more: http://www.wjla.com/articles/2015/06/virginia-anesthesiologist-ordered-to-pay-500k-in-damages-for-insulting-sedated-patient-115007.html#ixzz3eBOyKtzJ
Follow us: @ABC7News on Twitter | WJLATV on Facebook
Apparently the malpractice had to do with writing the false information on the medical chart. The defense seems to not have had an effective rebuttal for that so the jury must have been convinced that it did happen. That would be malpractice, I would think.
Somewhere there was a lengthy discussion about how and when defamation can occur. The way I understand it, the fact that the doctor made the statements to the medical team qualified as defamation. The patient was not anonymous to them. I guess one could argue that they could run into this patient in the future and this information could affect how they might treat the patient. Patients can have "reputations" with medical providers.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)occurred
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)but I'm clear on the idea that what's said in the OR is neither "confidential" nor "private."
Edit: Well, confidential and private with regard to the patient, but not *from* the patient.
yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)No one seems to know where she is practicing or if she even is still practicing.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(25,518 posts)DonCoquixote
(13,954 posts)to see so many defend the medical staff here. If these were a bunch of kids flipping burgers, calling you "retarded", you would be mad and calling for their heads.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)yellowcanine
(36,773 posts)I am not sure how a doctor closely monitors vital signs and the level of wakefulness of a patient under general anesthesia while entertaining the surgical team with her sophomoric humor.
Snow Leopard
(348 posts)That seems excessive. I'm not even sure an award is justified at all.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)They were cancer but since he did not get treatment early on, he now has cancer metastasized throughout his body including to his brain
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)
Vinca
(53,862 posts)I didn't want to wake up in the middle of surgery and hear anyone say "Oops." He seemed like a nice guy, but after reading this story I hope he didn't make any cracks about my fat behind. LOL.
PersonNumber503602
(1,134 posts)I don't think it's much of a stretch to assume she's like that with everyone. Such a horrible person can't have too many real friends.
whistler162
(11,155 posts)He is one of the top hip surgeons in the area. My mom had both her hips done by him one before and one after the incident came to light. He has grown a beard which stops him from looking like a Doc Martin/Martin Clunes look a-like contest reject, even with Dr. Clarke's accent. He is good. My mom was up and driving inside of a month after having her left hip totally replaced.