Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / January 2005
Is it proper to post legal issues in this ng?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
wwcp@infinet.com - 28 Jan 2005 15:59 GMT Just wondering if we are free to discuss any medical legal issues surrounding prostate cancer?
Paul
Olfart - 28 Jan 2005 16:12 GMT > Just wondering if we are free to discuss any medical legal issues > surrounding prostate cancer? > > Paul Why Not??? Anything even remotely connected to PCa is welcome - except snake oil spam
ehcorp1@lycos.com - 28 Jan 2005 16:13 GMT w...@infinet.com wrote:
> Just wondering if we are free to discuss any medical legal issues > surrounding prostate cancer? > > Paul Paul ... relax
You don't need special permission to inhale fresh air.
wwcp@infinet.com - 28 Jan 2005 17:02 GMT Cool, because this is starting to dwell on my mind now that I'm an 11 week old RP patient. Initially, I had no inclination to even get upset at my old doc (close to retirement) of 12 years, let alone sue him, for letting me get in this situation in the first place by refusing to give me blood tests when I asked him for them over the last 4 or 5 years. (?Is something wrong with you? Do you feel bad? Well, I can't just up and order up a blood test for nuthin'.. ) Because to tell the truth, I had no idea that I should be looking for a rising PSA. On the advice of an older family member, I wanted the blood tests to simply check for liver damage that seems to have taken a number of my family predecessors.
But, now that I've pretty much got a ?handle? (so to speak - lol) on what little I can immediately expect from the sexual side of being a RP patient and how much uninsured ?enhancement? medication I can opt to purchase and consume for the rest of my life if I would like Charley to resume some role in my life - I'm getting a little more upset at the old fart. (Who I fired 4 months ago because he refused to also help me with my chronic back problems with anything but Nuprin? arg. It was my initial physical by my new much younger doc that uncovered the 10.4 PSA!)
So, do any of you guys have experience (or, opinions) in ?going after? docs who let us get in these situations?? I'm sure it's a ?shot in the dark? at best to prove neglect. And, I would imagine ?damages? to some courts would be that I died -- which I don't think I did -- but, I really am not looking forward to the burden of 30 years of daily Viagra consumption at $10 bucks a pop?
Any ideas, guys???
Paul
James A. Honeychuck - 28 Jan 2005 17:30 GMT 11 weeks? Long enough to be frustrated, not long enough to warrant discouragement. Or a lawsuit.
Anyway, technically it's not the GP who did this to you, it's the surgeon. What papers did you sign for the surgeon?
jimhoney
> Cool, because this is starting to dwell on my mind now that I'm an 11 week > old RP patient. Initially, I had no inclination to even get upset at my old [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Paul Bill - 28 Jan 2005 17:55 GMT I happen to be a lawyer but do not do malpractice so I'm not giving you legal advice. But you hit the nail on the head - damages - and its inherent facet, causation. Your old GP did not cause your PCa so you can't sue him for that. Unless your surgeon screwed up or failed to discuss the risks and side effects, you can't sue him for the usual results of RP. You would have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that your disease and your prognosis were adversely affected by the delay in Dx. While I'm sure you could find experts to so testify, given the dearth and inconsistent results of long-term survival studies, they may not fly in court. In most states you have a year from discovery (Dx) to sue so, first, take care of yourself, and worry about him later.
Bill Denton RP 2/12/02 Memphis
Heather - 28 Jan 2005 19:42 GMT Hi Counsellor.....
I was a paralegal and am not offering legal advice either, but did I misread what he was asking about?? Suing the GP for not testing him for Pca. And then finding out that his PSA was 10+??
The same happened to Ron. He had two or three at 6, but nothing was said until he was 10 or so. Suing the GP for not including a PSA test is not, IMHO, actionable up here. Malpractice is one s.o.b. to prove and often drags on for many years.
I was offered the chance to sue a brainless GP by two specialists who were horrified by his malpractice some 30 years ago....I chose not to, knowing what an uphill battle it would be. Plus we did not then or now, to my knowledge, have your system of 'contingency fees', but it may have changed in the years I have been out of law.
Just a thought.....or perhaps I misread who he was thinking of suing.
Heather
> I happen to be a lawyer but do not do malpractice so I'm not giving you > legal advice. But you hit the nail on the head - damages - and its [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > RP 2/12/02 > Memphis Leonard Evens - 28 Jan 2005 21:26 GMT > Cool, because this is starting to dwell on my mind now that I'm an 11 week > old RP patient. Initially, I had no inclination to even get upset at my old [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Any ideas, guys??? You can try, but you probably may not get too far. There is still a significant part of the medical community which doesn't believe routine PSA testing is necessary or desirable. That is particularly true for older men, so it could depend on your age. If your doctor has been following what might roughly be considered standard methods, you are unlikely to collect anything. In addition, if he has retired, he may have limited resources from which to collect anything. He may no longer have any applicable malpractice insurance.
Be optimistic about the impotence. It may just go away. Also, Viagra is not going to be protected by patents forever, and eventually the price will come way down when generics go on the market. In any event, your total Viagra bill is going to be small potatoes, and I doubt if any attorney will take such a suit on contingency; you will probably have to pay up front.
There is a lot of mythology about malpractice. In actuality, few people who suffer from malpractice ever sue and even those that do don't usually get any satisfaction.
> Paul Steve Kramer - 29 Jan 2005 00:21 GMT I suspect that had he agreed to a blood test for liver function, your PSA would not have been known to him or you. Due to a jellyfish sting, I now get PSA and blood work (including for liver function) about every 4 months. They go into two vials for two separate tests, the results of which go to two different docs.
However, you should have been getting annual PSA testing for the 13 years before you were diagnosed. I suspect that that is such a recognized standard now that you might have something of a case.
 Signature Prostate Cancer Survivor (so far), not a doctor PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3bN0M0 PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron (1 mo) 07/21/2003 @ 48 PSA .07 .05 .06 Lupron (4 mo) 8/03 (48), 12/03, 4/04 (49), 09/04 (50) non Illegitimi carborundum
> Cool, because this is starting to dwell on my mind now that I'm an 11 week > old RP patient. Initially, I had no inclination to even get upset at my old [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > So, do any of you guys have experience (or, opinions) in "going after" docs
> who let us get in these situations?? I'm sure it's a "shot in the dark" at
> best to prove neglect. And, I would imagine "damages" to some courts would > be that I died -- which I don't think I did -- but, I really am not looking [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Paul c palmer - 29 Jan 2005 07:44 GMT not posted to the newsgroup - private email
hi paul - psa 10.4 - 30 years of daily viagra, you gave no age, but i assume you had an active sex life.
you doctor sounds a lot like my old doctor. he was a member at my store and i've known him for years. one day, i decided to get a physical. it had been 11 years since i had one and i was still feeling as healthy as a horse. i specially told him that i wanted a psa test because of my father having pca. so, when i came back for a followup appt and ask how the psa test turn out, he used the words, "it's normal" i was just starting to research pca because of my dad and accepted those words. to this day, i still do not know my numbers from him.
so, let's say for the sake of argument that i did have a rising psa back then, could i blame him for my problem? answer - no. i would have to prove that he was negligent and mis dx'ed me and at that time, it was neither.
i do remember a person who had a psa of 16 and it when another year when the psa was into the non-curable area that he found out he had prostate cancer. he was never given a biopsy nor was he told by his doctor there was any reason for alarm.
another case in point......another friend. stage T1c, psa 6. had RP, had seminal vessel involvement but the surgeon didn't remove them. as a result, the seminal vessels were absorbed into the body and the pca spread throughout his body and put him in stage T3a within a year. at present, he trying to sue the doctor, but is taking it the criminal route because for a surgeon to do this procedure knowing that he is considered at expert in prostate cancer is the same as killing him. i haven't heard any more on his case.
when you start getting into the legal field, i remember sitting in class and the instructor said, "there are approximately 3 1/2 million laws on the books in the united states and each and every person is responsible for knowing each and every one of them because ignorance of the law is no excuse."
also, here's another point to ponder. we are suing a hospital and doctor for malpractice. so far, it has cost us over 10,000 cash out of our pockets and has taken 5 years to get it this far and is not even close to going to trial. and it's a hands down win type case. i have the leading doctor on her case who put in her records that she did not get the best of care. my son video taped every day she was in the hospital (36 days) and you can see how her condition went down hill and can show where the doctor being sued lied about treatment. what was suppose to take 4 days took 36 and they want us to pay for all their mistakes. the malpractice lawyer sent an email over to the other laywer i have working on the case and across the header of the letter, he had wrote, "we have a winner" but when will i see a penny of it? it's one thing to talk about suing for malpractice - it another to actually be involved in a case.
you are upset with the way things are going, but what's you have described as post op is common. what were you told before you had surgery by your doctor or surgeon? did they tell you that your life would never be the same? did they tell you that your erections will never be better than what you had at present - that is the best you can hope for. in other words.....a person who is starting to suffer from ED is not going to be cured and probably be far worse off afterwars.
if you are wanting to get old willy back.....you are going to have to fight for it. sure, you can try viagra and the other ED drugs, but old willy had a routine - like standing up and looking at you when you woke up. it is up to you to take the actions needed in order to back him back. i did and can say that i was able to use willy 30 days after surgery and i'm 21 mo. post op and don't need any ED drugs to get an erection - so there's life after RP's but you can't wait for nature to take it's course or else you may be playing with a dead battery.
hope you're getting dry and have no other complications. if you have any questions - ask.
~ curtis
knowledge is power - growing old is mandatory - growing wise is optional "Many more men die with prostate cancer than of it. Growing old is invariably fatal. Prostate cancer is only sometimes so." http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc
c palmer - 29 Jan 2005 11:53 GMT i decided to post it to the newsgroup instead of sending private email.......
~ curtis
knowledge is power - growing old is mandatory - growing wise is optional "Many more men die with prostate cancer than of it. Growing old is invariably fatal. Prostate cancer is only sometimes so." http://community.webtv.net/PALMER_ENT/doc
Clarence Crow - 28 Jan 2005 19:36 GMT >Just wondering if we are free to discuss any medical legal issues >surrounding prostate cancer? > >Paul I'd be worrying more about the other consequences of catheters, diapers, PSA re-surgence, poss ADT and RAD as salvage therapies, than what might happen to your pecker.
You wouldn't have enough money to fight a lengthy lawsuit and you wouldn't win!
Enjoy!
-- Reader to complete... -- Please reply to this ng as my email adress is fake:
-- Regards
-- CC
wwcp@infinet.com - 28 Jan 2005 21:02 GMT I'm rolling on the floor with this very accurate assessment and subsequent advice, Clarence... lol... Actually, most of my female acquaintances throughout this long fragmented yet basically fun filled life have suggested that "my brains are in my pecker." I know I wouldn't be having these shallow concerns in view of my potential doom if I had been, lets say, a bass fisherman.. However, I find it a bit of a "stretch" to think I would have had near as much fun... lol
I will take seriously your (and, the other very helpful posters) legal perspective. I don't have a lot of money to fight such an apparent uphill and fruitless legal battle against an old doc that I really don't want to cause any harm in his retiring years ("WHAT ABOUT MINE, DOC???") So, I guess my choices are going to be either donate a small fortune to some lawyer's children's trust fund - spend the same amount of money on Viarga for the rest of my life - or, buy a bass boat... ("Whar's that phone number for Rite-Aid??? lol)
Thanks so much, guys, for putting up with my rather self-centered "wonder" down legal lane - and, answering with such straight forward clear logic. I knew you guys would know...
Thanks,
Paul
Steve Kramer - 29 Jan 2005 00:16 GMT During November, you became a member in good standing. You can discuss any prostate cancer issue you desire.
Not that I have any authority over anything you would discuss anyway.
 Signature Prostate Cancer Survivor (so far), not a doctor PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3bN0M0 PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron (1 mo) 07/21/2003 @ 48 PSA .07 .05 .06 Lupron (4 mo) 8/03 (48), 12/03, 4/04 (49), 09/04 (50) non Illegitimi carborundum
> Just wondering if we are free to discuss any medical legal issues > surrounding prostate cancer? > > Paul
|
|
|