From: Bernie and Beverly Doucette <bnb@cybrzn.com> To: Multiple recipients of list ADHESIONS <adhesions@forum.obgyn.net> Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2000 1:36 PM Subject: Re: malpractice
> Karen,
>
> You are so right when you say that you'd trade places with her in a heart
> beat. I feel the same. I am part of the big phenfen lawsuit...a surgeon
> had suggested it before he would do surgery. After taking the drugs for 6
> months I developed leakage of 3 of my heart valves (it is improving thank
> God!). Outsiders think that the $4 billion settlement is so great...but
> ultimately we are all getting screwed. In order to protect myself in the
> event that it should get worse, I will need to stay in this settlement and
> accept $6,000 as payment for my problems. I had an echocardiogram 1 year
> before I took the drugs when I developed an infection in my central line.
> Everything tested normal. When the cardiologist saw the results of my
echo
> after having taken the drugs he said that phenfen had to have caused the
> problem because there was no way that hypertension could make it that much
> worse in that short of time....I didn't develop hypertension until after I
> took the drugs anyway. Now, despite still having hypertension (its worse
> now than before) my valves are improving, but the cardiologist is now
saying
> its from the hypertension....that there never was a problem with the
> drugs...that the fda overreacted and that there may be 20 people across
the
> world that have a problem. I know more people than that! And while my
> valve leakage is improving...there is no saying that it will not get
worse.
> What makes me the angriest is that this company has been proven to know
> about the problems and hid it from the fda and the American people. It
> isn't that I am out for money....I am sure not going to get rich from
> this.....I just want to stand up and say to the pharmaceutical
> companies...hey! you can't do this! Do I opt out of the settlement and
> risk losing money should I lose? The $6000 being offered doesn't even
cover
> the past medical bills! Anyway....enough of my soap box.....I just wanted
> to say that it is very hard to prove medical malpractice....and very hard
to
> get an attorney to accept the case unless they see a case that they know
> will be found in their client's behalf. It is a shame that the justice
> system is not on our side when it comes to things like that.
>
> Whatever, we do need to achieve recognition of this disorder and the
doctors
> that really abuse the victims of it!
> I feel that we need to be more proactive in fighting for our cause.
>
> Karla N.
>> ----- Original Message -----
> From: alanbaleyko <alanjess@yourlink.net>
> To: Multiple recipients of list ADHESIONS <adhesions@forum.obgyn.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 4:09 PM
> Subject: Re: malpractice
>
> > Hi Karen, Go for it! Go for the New York times, a new lawyer, anything
> you can
> > think of. We have got to get the word out on ARD if only to help
prevent
> others
> > from getting as bad as we all are! If I had known something about
> adhesions, I
> > would have investigated more before I agreed to a 2nd c section, hernia
> surgery,
> > tubal ligation, and hysterectomy!! We have got to let other women know
> that
> > adhesions can be a side effect of abdominal surgery because the doctors
> are sure
> > not going to tell us!! Take care of yourself, Jessica Baleyko
> >
> > Karen Kaplan wrote:
> >
> > > Malpractice is much harder to sue for than we think - only 1 in 65
cases
> of
> > > proven malpractice actually file suit - mostly because the lawyers can
> be so
> > > choosy. They seem to want the easy ones to prove with big $.
> > > I established that my surgeon failed to provide the proper standard of
> care
> > > when she ignored my high pre-admission prothrombin time and proceeded
to
> > > surgery. That is the 1st and most critical step: failure to provide
> > > standard of care. That finally got a lawyer to agree to even review
my
> > > case!
> > > The 2nd step is to prove that this failure caused harm. The 3rd step
is
> > > that the harm caused $ damages. I had an agressive New York lawyer
> review
> > > my case - he declined because it was too difficult. When I suggested
it
> was
> > > time to set a precedent on ARD, he said the medical establishment
> wouldn't
> > > let that happen. Adhesions are difficult because they are a common
> > > outcome of many types of surgeries.
> > >
> > > You cannot imagine how I reacted to this women in NY whose ob/gyn
carved
> his
> > > initials on her after he delivered her baby by C-section. Said he did
> such
> > > a beautiful job that he had to sign it! Now claims to have a form of
> > > Alzheimer's.
> > > She just settled for $1.75 million (expletive deleted)! And the
> Manhattan
> > > DA has filed assault charges!. I'd trade places with her in a
heartbeat
> if
> > > it meant I'd only have scars on the outside, and I'm sure all of you
> feel
> > > the same. When I asked this lawyer why this was malpractice, he
said -
> it
> > > was easy to prove and she was going to be traumatized every day she
saw
> > > those scars.
> > > I told him that I am traumatized every minute I am awake because of
the
> > > constant pain from my last surgery and what is happening inside.
> > > I am thinking of going to the NY Times on this one - it's so absurd,
and
> > > criminal, to deny that ARD causes pain and suffering and then treat
such
> > > vandalism as malpractice.
> > > What do you all think?
> > > Karen
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Helen Dynda <olddad66@runestone.net>
> > > To: Multiple recipients of list ADHESIONS <adhesions@forum.obgyn.net>
> > > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 6:27 PM
> > > Subject: Patient Advocacy and Insurance -- websites
> > >
> > > > **[ Patient Advocacy and Insurance ]**
> > > >
> > > > 1.) * Patient Told Illness in Her Head Forced to Leave HMO to Get
> Proper
> > > > Care
> > > >
> > > > http://consumerwatchdog.org/public_hts/medical/casofday/me100013.htm
> > > >
> > > > 2.) * HMO Stonewalling Woman Costs Woman Fertility
> > > >
> > > > http://consumerwatchdog.org/public_hts/medical/casualty/connie.htm
> > > >
> > > > 3.) * The HMO Page (sponsored by The National Organization of
> Physicians
> > > Who
> > > > Care)
> > > >
> > > > http://www.hmopage.org/
> > > >
> > > > 4.) * Managed Care Reform - How Texas Pulled Off What Washington
Can't
> > > >
> > > > http://www.managedcaremag.com/archiveMC/9902/9902.states.shtml
> > > >
> > > > 5.) * Summary of Medical Malpractice Law in Texas
> > > >
> > > > http://www.mcandl.com/texas.html
> > > >
> > > > 6.) * Decoding Medical Acronyms
> > > >
> > > > http://www.patientadvocacy.org/main/insurance/acronyms.html
> > > >
> > > > 7.) * The Patient Advocacy Page - Promoting fairness and equality in
> our
> > > > health care system
> > > >
> > > > http://people.delphi.com/graphking/health.htm
> > > >
> > > > 8.) * Managed Care Showdown in Texas
> > > >
> > > > http://www.physiciansnews.com/cover/299.html
> > > >
> > > > 9.) * National Organization of Physicians Who Care
> > > >
> > > > http://www.pwc.org/
> > > >
> > > > 10.) * Your Money & Your Life - America's Managed Care Revolution
(PBS
> > > > Special)
> > > >
> > > > http://www.wnet.org/archive/mhc/index.html
> > > >
> http://www.adhesions.org/forums/listcmds.htm
> > > >
> > >
> > > to the unsubscribe form at
http://www.adhesions.org/forums/listcmds.htm
> >
>