Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Stopped Breathing.
Options
Comments
-
Thats exactly what I didn't say in my post if you had bothered to read it. :rolleyes:
The first step to improving health care and preventing accidents is to introduce a "no fault" culture where accidents are investigated with a view to preventing their reoccurrence. This requires an open culture of non-confrontation and self examination. The airline industry, Engineering etc have all moved to this system as in the medium to long term it improves outcomes for all.
Introducing words like negligence and the use of lawyers prevents this and creates a culture of defensive medicine and attempts to hide mistakes. The opposite of what you allege you want.
In your example it's a systems failure and should be treated as such. Not some conspiracy or deliberate attempt to inflict harm.
In the meantime, without the use of lawyers, patients who have negative outcomes get the supports they need. So you cancer patient gets the treatment and support they need, and dependents get the financial support they need. Not lawyers getting rich of massive claims.
If it turns out the medical professional was grossly incompetent then professional misconduct is the way to go rather then an out of court settlement
If it was deliberate we have a criminal system to deal with the Nearys of the world.
You're naive if you think a situation can or should exist whereby Irish clinicians and management will put their professional reputations on the line and will sit down with injured people from medical negligence or deceased persons family members and openly admit fault for clinical negligence.
They will do that anyway in private or internally and if the harm is serious enough HIQA and/or the Medical Council will get involved.
However where does that leave the injured person or the family? You say if your model was adopted "patients who have negative outcomes get the supports they need".
I'm interested to know how you think that would be so. Take an example where there is a birth mismanagement causing brain damage from birth asphyxia and the child then requires lifelong care and support potentially running into millions of Euro for the duration of that person's life, long after their parents die.
Do you actually see a situation where the medical personnel/management with the consent of their insurers will admit liability themselves and offer to compensate fully and properly and by that I mean into millions of Euro for such a situation? Again if you do think that is workable you are naive.0 -
Peregrinus wrote: »Yes. Sometimes medical questions can't be answered. That's something we have to live with.
I understand that the OP and his wife want to know, as much as they can, what happened and why it happened. He doesn't suggest that his wife suffered any injury beyond the immediate incident, or any long-term consequences, and he explicitly says he is not looking for compensation. He just wants to know what happened and why, and that's a perfectly reasonable thing to want to know, if only because that knowledge might affect future decisions his wife would take about anaesthesia.
The fact that he has raised the question on the legal board rather than, say, the health sciences board is unfortunate, as is the fact that he orginally framed his question in terms of negligence on the part of the medics (though I see the thread title has been changed). That context, I think, has created a misleading impression about what he's after, and has coloured some of the replies he got.
In a way, if this incident were shown to be the result of somebody's negligence, that would be a good outcome, since there is then no reason to expect recurrence. Whereas if his wife turns out to have an abnormally low threshold for anaesthesia or an intolerance for a particular anaesthetic or something of the kind, that does complicate decisions about future treatment. But it's definitely something you want to know.
OP, you're embarked on a medical investigation here, not a legal proceeding. Don't approach this in a confrontational way, don't start off with preconceptions about not trusting this or that investigation, and don't involve lawyers. Your starting point should be to ask your GP to refer you to another anaesthetist who will look at what happened, and offer you an opinion as to what might have caused it and advice about its implications for future healthcare decisions.
You will have to pay for this, but it will certainly cost you less than going down the legal route. Even if you find a solicitor who will investigate this on a no-foal no-fee basis (and I'll be very surprised if you will, since as yet there is nothing to suggest that this could ever turn into a paying case, and in any event you've said you're not interested in monetary compensation) that solicitor will need to obtain expert medical opinion, and the medics do not work on a no-foal no-fee basis. And they charge much more for medico-legal reports than they do for therapeutic consultations.
Leave the lawyers out of this unless and until you know you have a legal claim, and that you wish to pursue it.
I agree generally with the tenor of what you say I don't however think the OP's partner should be dissuaded from getting an independent expert medical opinion through a solicitor whicih will serve two purposes:
1. Give answers
2. Establish whether there is a case in law for negligence
By all means the OP's partner can go down the the softly-softly avenue of seeking an internal review through the hospital for answers but at the same time explore the same issues outside of the hospital with persons independent and not connected to the hospital.
Also the OP's partner also needs to be mindful of the Statute of Limitations which is two years from the date of injury or knowledge of harm if she wishes to seek compensation should negligence and harm be proven. The clock in that regard has very arguably has began to tick.0 -
I agree generally with the tenor of what you say I don't however think the OP's partner should be dissuaded from getting an independent expert medical opinion through a solicitor whicih will serve two purposes:
1. Give answers
2. Establish whether there is a case in law for negligence
By all means the OP's partner can go down the the softly-softly avenue of seeking an internal review through the hospital for answers but at the same time explore the same issues outside of the hospital with persons independent and not connected to the hospital.
Also the OP's partner also needs to be mindful of the Statute of Limitations which is two years from the date of injury or knowledge of harm if she wishes to seek compensation should negligence and harm be proven. The clock in that regard has very arguably has began to tick.
OK if going that route.
Diificulty is that if litigation is proposed usually no Irish medico will report or give evidence about another's case.
You have to go to the UK. Pay £1500/2000 or so. Those guys do not understand "no foal, no fee". There was a time when solicitors could fund the cost, but those days are gone.
You need to carefully consider whom you consult. Best to have personal recommendation from a solicitor who has worked with such. Working from internet or lists circulated to solicitors may not be the best.
I have always advised people to avoid litigation, especially med neg , unless there is no alternative.
It is very stressful, very uncertain.
So, is there serious injury here?0 -
I agree generally with the tenor of what you say I don't however think the OP's partner should be dissuaded from getting an independent expert medical opinion through a solicitor whicih will serve two purposes:
1. Give answers
2. Establish whether there is a case in law for negligence
By all means the OP's partner can go down the the softly-softly avenue of seeking an internal review through the hospital for answers but at the same time explore the same issues outside of the hospital with persons independent and not connected to the hospital.
Also the OP's partner also needs to be mindful of the Statute of Limitations which is two years from the date of injury or knowledge of harm if she wishes to seek compensation should negligence and harm be proven. The clock in that regard has very arguably has began to tick.
All well and good but your ignoring an important point ... Is there an injury to begin with ??? The op has failed to say either way so we can presume there is no injury and the fact he posted his query in the legal forum suggests to me that he was initially seeing if he could avail of some easy money !!
He has since discounted that this was the case but re read the initial post . My opinion is that he wanted dollars rather than answers at first.0 -
You're naive if you think a situation can or should exist whereby Irish clinicians and management will put their professional reputations on the line and will sit down with injured people from medical negligence or deceased persons family members and openly admit fault for clinical negligence.
They will do that anyway in private or internally and if the harm is serious enough HIQA and/or the Medical Council will get involved.
Hence the no fault approach. Do you think Pilots and Engineers not have the same issues. Your approach of confrontation is worse because you force people into being defensive. If you are paranoid and think everyone is biased fine - I suspect if you lost the court case the judges would be biased too and nothing less then a UN brokered European Court of Human rights international committee of investigation would do.
The solution is an open culture - your approach kills that stone dead an makes it less likely the truth will come out.However where does that leave the injured person or the family? You say if your model was adopted "patients who have negative outcomes get the supports they need".
I'm interested to know how you think that would be so. Take an example where there is a birth mismanagement causing brain damage from birth asphyxia and the child then requires lifelong care and support potentially running into millions of Euro for the duration of that person's life, long after their parents die.
Again - you are ignoring what I said. What I did say was instead of a massive lump sum made up by a judge and a significant chunk taken by solicitors the state pays out on a monthly basis from a medical claims scheme based on need and paid out as long as the patient and family require support. Medical claims should not be like the lottery - is it fair that a child wins €2m and dies the following week vs a child getting the same but living until 72 and needs support all that time? And the money paid out does not come from insurance - the state self insures - that money is taken from the general funding so is lost to other patients.
Most of these cases are negligent but the HSE/Hospital does not dispute on the grounds it's the only way to currently get the money out of the system.Do you actually see a situation where the medical personnel/management with the consent of their insurers will admit liability themselves and offer to compensate fully and properly and by that I mean into millions of Euro for such a situation? Again if you do think that is workable you are naive.
I've already argued against the lottery approach to medical claims. In a no fault system your thesis is irrelvant.
What I am saying is the question be changed from "Who do we sue" to "What went wrong and how do we prevent it occuring again". The outcomes being process change, training, new controls. In certain cases where gross negligence occurs the route will lead towards the relevant certifiying authority (IMO, INO etc). Again, not insurers unless being privately treated by a consultant - but the state pays their insurance and just in case you don't understand insurance, the state pays in as much as is paid out.0 -
Advertisement
-
Anesthesiologist was in contact today... seems there was an error in procedure. The ammount of the drug given was too much. Not 100% sure of details but were going in for meeting and tests next week.
I will not be looking for compo...
Hawkelady.. your opinion means nothing to me.. just because you had a bad experience and got on with it, dosent mean everyone has to be that stupid.0 -
OK if going that route.
Diificulty is that if litigation is proposed usually no Irish medico will report or give evidence about another's case.
You have to go to the UK. Pay £1500/2000 or so. Those guys do not understand "no foal, no fee". There was a time when solicitors could fund the cost, but those days are gone.
You need to carefully consider whom you consult. Best to have personal recommendation from a solicitor who has worked with such. Working from internet or lists circulated to solicitors may not be the best.
I have always advised people to avoid litigation, especially med neg , unless there is no alternative.
It is very stressful, very uncertain.
So, is there serious injury here?
Indeed it's outlay the OP's partner will need to pay and depending on the circumstances it could be outlay well spent if only to give an independent expert opinion.
Litigation is the only recourse to obtain compensation. There is no alternative than that. Yes it can be stressful and fraught with uncertainty but that's where the comfort of an expert medical opinion comes in to allay those concerns.0 -
All well and good but your ignoring an important point ... Is there an injury to begin with ??? The op has failed to say either way so we can presume there is no injury and the fact he posted his query in the legal forum suggests to me that he was initially seeing if he could avail of some easy money !!
He has since discounted that this was the case but re read the initial post . My opinion is that he wanted dollars rather than answers at first.
If there is no harm (physical and/or psychological) then one of the essential ingredients for a successful clinical negligence claim is absent and there will not be a case.
None of us here (including the OP and his partner) have the complete facts of this case (including the medical facts and the consequence/significance of them) so no point speculating or making moral judgements.0 -
Hence the no fault approach. Do you think Pilots and Engineers not have the same issues. Your approach of confrontation is worse because you force people into being defensive. If you are paranoid and think everyone is biased fine - I suspect if you lost the court case the judges would be biased too and nothing less then a UN brokered European Court of Human rights international committee of investigation would do.
The solution is an open culture - your approach kills that stone dead an makes it less likely the truth will come out.
Again - you are ignoring what I said. What I did say was instead of a massive lump sum made up by a judge and a significant chunk taken by solicitors the state pays out on a monthly basis from a medical claims scheme based on need and paid out as long as the patient and family require support. Medical claims should not be like the lottery - is it fair that a child wins €2m and dies the following week vs a child getting the same but living until 72 and needs support all that time? And the money paid out does not come from insurance - the state self insures - that money is taken from the general funding so is lost to other patients.
Most of these cases are negligent but the HSE/Hospital does not dispute on the grounds it's the only way to currently get the money out of the system.
I've already argued against the lottery approach to medical claims. In a no fault system your thesis is irrelvant.
What I am saying is the question be changed from "Who do we sue" to "What went wrong and how do we prevent it occuring again". The outcomes being process change, training, new controls. In certain cases where gross negligence occurs the route will lead towards the relevant certifiying authority (IMO, INO etc). Again, not insurers unless being privately treated by a consultant - but the state pays their insurance and just in case you don't understand insurance, the state pays in as much as is paid out.
I'm not paranoid, I have professional experience of the system and clinical negligence matters to know what I'm talking about. I don't force clinicians to be defensive, they naturally are as is any professional person when their career and reputation is on the block.
I have confidence in the judicial process, I've none whatsoever in internal investigations amongst state agencies or private organisations such as private hospitals investigating and sanctioning their employees/agents particularly in serious issues of patient harm or possibly death.
You mention staged compensation payments and there is work being done at the moment about bringing that in. I support that. At the moment the courts are faced with a difficult task of trying to measure compensation running into millions when the plaintiff might die next week. That is not a satisfactory situation.
The State does self insure through the CIS but not private hospitals (with certain limited exceptions), they have their own insurers.
So really you your arguments are laudable but ill-thought out and in reality not workable in practice.0 -
Im not looking for comp, i want to know what happened to my partner and if anything similar has happened to people out there.
If it is a fault on the part of the anesthesiologist then i would like to know.
we have a meeting with doctors to get her checked out in 2 weeks.
People are saying forget about it if shes fine now... so if a person is robbed and the times stolen are given back them ... you should forget about it ... no harm done! ridiculous.
I work 40 hrs a week and so does my partner.. were not looking for easy money.. just answers
.0 -
Advertisement
-
Anesthesiologist was in contact today... seems there was an error in procedure. The ammount of the drug given was too much. Not 100% sure of details but were going in for meeting and tests next week.
I will not be looking for compo...
Hawkelady.. your opinion means nothing to me.. just because you had a bad experience and got on with it, dosent mean everyone has to be that stupid.
Wow , well done with the name calling .. Shows what type of person you are.
Expect opinions when you start threads on a public forum!!!!!!
We're are 3 pages in to this thread and you have yet to clarify if there was any injury caused to your other half.. So I'll leave it at that, no need to reply as I'm not going to be following this thread anymore .
Life goes on,eh?0 -
does anyone know of a situation similar to this. something went wrong with epidural.I had a c section a few years ago , the epidural didn't work and I felt everything as I was cut openHawkelady.. your opinion means nothing to me..
You ask for someone who had a similar experience, you get someone who had a similar experience, but because it doesn't meet with your idea as to what you want it is irrelevant.
It lends credence to the theory that you are looking for legal compensation advice, not medical.0 -
It doesn't really matter if he is after compensation though. If someone was negligent and his wife's life was put in danger needlessly, she suffered at the time, could potentially suffer more into the future, OP suffered the ordeal, what is wrong with wanting to be compensated for that suffering?
Many people with genuine medical negligence cases suffer types of PTSD and other psychological problems even if their physical injuries have healed. To move on with their lives and seek appropriate treatment will cost money. What if OP's wife gets pregnant again, I can't imagine how she would feel going back in to labour again.
I do not believe that the medical profession are all above board. They can be negligent, and in some cases make human mistakes, but they must be held to account for it, and if people suffer needlessly and face serious financial outlay in the future as a result of those actions, they need to be compensated.
Hypothetically speaking, would you want to go through that ordeal and live with the psychological repercussions and with 100k compensation in your bank, or have a nice straightforward birth? I know what I would choose. People are too quick to jump down the OPs throat - it must have been a terrifying experience for him.
Furthermore, if OP just slunk off home without asking any questions, and the medical practitioner(s) in question was negligent, they could continue on as they were and kill someone. Then we would have a thread somewhere about how terrible it is that nobody held this person to account despite X amount of serious incidents in the past...
OP is entitled to question and investigate what happened. If someone was negligent he is entitled to take a claim. If he/his wife is compensated for their suffering it does not make them greedy.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 25439
Wow , well done with the name calling .. Shows what type of person you are.
Expect opinions when you start threads on a public forum!!!!!!
We're are 3 pages in to this thread and you have yet to clarify if there was any injury caused to your other half.. So I'll leave it at that, no need to reply as I'm not going to be following this thread anymore .
Life goes on,eh?
They may not have been an injury, but having a c-section increases the likelihood of another c-section on a subsequent pregnancy. So it would be wise of the OP to find out if his wife happened to have a bad reaction to a medication in case the wife has another c-section down the line, or indeed for any other surgical procedure, whether planned or emergency.
I know if a reaction to a medication made me stop breathing I'd be wrecking their heads telling them over and over while being wheeled to theatre.
OP, I read your thread yesterday and initially thought that "well, mum and baby are fine, why bother" but then I thought about subsequent procedures she might need, so I do think its wise to know. A family member had a birth that didnt go according to plan. Luckily everyone was ok, but it could have been very different. Like you, it was afterwards that they looked back and thought "Fuuuu... what happened there??"
Like you, they have no interest in compensation, but asked the hospital to review the case. They felt that if they were being stonewalled after that point, they might consider the legal route, but the hospital found that procedures were not followed and have put measures in place so similar does not happen at another birth. They are happy with this.0 -
Obviously the object of personal injury cases are to restore the plaintiffs, as best as possible, to their situation prior to some calamitous event.
But in that there is an implied secondary purpose, which is one of law enforcement.
I think actions for personal injuries damages are fantastic.
They are a particularly useful form of law enforcement by responsible citizens. Without personal injuries cases, there would be no serious incentive for the health and safety regulations, the standard operating practices, and the precise systems of service delivery we all cherish.
Personal injuries keep service providers on their toes to interact with the private citizen in a way that is responsible and just, according to society's codes and values.
Nowhere is this more important than in a health care setting.
I really wish the people who treat Legal Discussion like it were Personal Issues or Judge Judy would clear off. Who cares about what your personal moral judgement is of others? I don't think anybody cares at all, or gives it any heed.0 -
Must admit I never thought of any PI action as law enforcement
On that basis you could get a plaintiiff refusing to settle unless e,g there is an undertaking to install certain safety protocols or whatever.
It would be getting close to a plaintiff saying "it is not the money, it's the principle" - one of the most dangerous sentences in litigation0 -
so you should be angry very very angry they could have killed her if I were you id contact a solicitor asap and sue.the hse0
-
Must admit I never thought of any PI action as law enforcement
On that basis you could get a plaintiiff refusing to settle unless e,g there is an undertaking to install certain safety protocols or whatever.
It would be getting close to a plaintiff saying "it is not the money, it's the principle" - one of the most dangerous sentences in litigation
Not really nonetheless what cody pomeray is getting at is it acts as a stick on occupiers to ensure their premises are safe to visitors and rec users. Same with services including professional services.0 -
The point is, if this is medical negligence (and that's an if, for that you should consult a solicitor), you have the right to sue. Legislation (and I suppose the constitution, re right of access to the courts) gives you that entitlement, and even though the source of the right probably has moral underpinnings, there's no requirement to only exercise it when it's morally correct to do so.
Basically - if you have been affected by medical negligence and you want to take action, you can do so, and that's not restricted to certain situations. The logic of disturbing a healthcare team and preventing them from learning from their mistakes is pretty silly. To assume it's better off not to sue doctors/ nurses to allow them to learn sort of implies less "important" careers would not have this quasi immunity. Don't put the hospital on a pedestal. It's equally covered by any laws re medical negligence. (In fact, if being smart one might say medical negligence jurisprudence has been developed exactly for situations like this.)0 -
I'm saying the law enforcement aspect is typically incidental.Must admit I never thought of any PI action as law enforcement
On that basis you could get a plaintiiff refusing to settle unless e,g there is an undertaking to install certain safety protocols or whatever.
It would be getting close to a plaintiff saying "it is not the money, it's the principle" - one of the most dangerous sentences in litigation
It doesn't matter that it may not be the foremost aim of a particular plaintiff. Resort to the courts by individuals who have suffered a personal injury carries with it an implicit law enforcement element. As long as the courts do their job properly, society benefits from this.
My point is that we need personal injury cases - and fear thereof - to regulate and bolster our legal obligations to one another.0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement