To sue or not to sue

[Beth_yu]

I worked for an opthalmologist for a year in a clinic in southeast asia country.

This is a country where doctors are considered sacred profession and should not be sued for any malpractice..etc

However, the Association of Physician and Surgeons in that country allow a malpractice..etc case to be brought to the court for lawsuit if :

a) A licensed doctor/surgeon is willing to testify for any malpractice, accident, etc..


b)It is evident that something not correct has been done on the patient....misdiagnosed...etc

So, there was this man about 53 years old who has 5 children aged 3, 7, 14 and a very ill wife. Initially, he was supposed to have a simple cataract surgery on the left eye and then later on the right eye (Both eyes have cataract and vision was blurred)

However, due to a young doctor's fault, this simple surgery somehow had caused him his eye. There was infection. Clearly, the surgical instruments weren't sterilized properly. (Note: in this country, doctors have to do everything including sterilizing the surgical instruments)

The man came to this clinic and the opthalmologist whom I worked for told him that he needed to get his eye replaced with an artificial one (He lost his one eye). When the man left, he told me that there was infection due to the earlier doctor's fault.

This poor man is not rich and work all his life to support his family.

The opthalmologist told me that a lawsuit could be filed for his case but he was unwilling to testify for that man. He said that he didn't want to cost another young doctor's bright future and that testifying would only angered other doctors and his ruined his business.

So, since this poor man lives in the district where my parents live, I know that he didn't file for lawsuit or get any compensation. I doubt that he even knows that he should be filing for compensation. Now, he is working and living with only one eye and a job which pays him barely enough for his kids' education.

Note:In a country where doctors are protected and there was never a lawsuit against any doctors or medical institution.

My question:
If you are the opthalmologist, will you testify for that poor man?

If you have all the evidence that it is the young doctor's fault, would you help that poor man and cause this young doctor's his license, future, and career?
And again, do you really care how other doctors perceive you if you are willing to do what is right or what is justice for the people?

I realise this is a long post.
I apologize for the spelling, grammatical mistakes and etc for English is not my first language and I have tried hard to improve.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Beth_yu]

34 visitors and no reply...

Is it that hard to answer those questions or
it is way too long to read or
my explanation isn't clear enough or
my English is not what it supposed to be ?

 

[Giving My .02]

It is hard to compare this experience with the moral code in America especially since it occured in another country. For instance, I know in smaller cities here in America, lawyers will not sue a doctor in their own city, or that is an unspoken rule. A lawyer from outside the community would sue for mal-practice. I am not sure that all attorneys do this, but I know it is one of those rules, at least where I come from. Since this occured in a completely different culture, there are several "hidden" elements that you may not know about concerning the doctor testifying. It might not only hurt him, but hurt his business. It is in fact troubling, but I know the same thing occurs here in America none the less. Futhermore, I can not judge your doctor since I believe that this story contains a certain about of ethnocentrism (I am copying and pasting this definition from a website I looked up quickly that explained the definition of this word better than I could). Hope that might help.

"Ethnocentrism" is a commonly used word in circles where ethnicity, inter-ethnic relations, and similar social issues are of concern. The usual definition of the term is "thinking one's own group's ways are superior to others" or "judging other groups as inferior to one's own." But this definition only reflects part of the attitude involved in ethnocentrism, and, more important, does not address the underlying issue of why people do this. Most people, thinking of the shallow definition, believe that they are not ethnocentric, but are rather "open minded" and "tolerant." However, as explained below, everyone is ethnocentric, and there is no way not to be ethnocentric... it cannot be avoided, nor can it be willed away by a positive or well-meaning attitude.

To address the deeper issues involved in ethnocentrism calls for a more explicit definition. In this sense, ethnocentrism can be defined as: making false assumptions about others' ways based on our own limited experience. The key word is assumptions, because we are not even aware that we are being ethnocentric... we don't understand that we don't understand.

 

[Lux Aeterna]

Hi Beth,

Your english is fine and I totally understood the question. I just didn't respond b/c I wanted to think about it a bit more. It is easy to say, coming from an American perspective, where patients' rights are at the forefront, that we would testify on behalf of that man.

But in a society where this is not the case--and I hope I am not being callous--it is understandably hard to break out of that cycle and put your career on the line for this one patient. But hey, I am of the mind that change starts with individuals, and if this doctor could talk to others in the field and get more backing, it would be an easier road for him i.e. less of a risk of losing hurting his business, being ostracized by his peers etc. What that man who lost his eye is going through is terrible, and at what point does society admit that it needs to make changes for the welfare of its ordinary people. I think it is cases like this that could be the jumping off point, especially if you are able to collect more cases where the same kind of error happened. If patients as well could somehow stand up for their rights (and I know it is tough in some societies with the government and stuff) too....

hope that made some sense...?

 

[tinkerbelle]

You say that there has never been a lawsuit against any doctors or medical institutions in this country. So assume you do get an opthamologist to testify for the poor old man. What are the chances you will actually win and who decides this?

I think I would first talk to the poor man and see what he thinks. He might not even believe in bringing a lawsuit against a doctor. But if he does want to pursue the lawsuit, heck yeah, I would help him if I thought that the young doctor WAS REALLY AT FAULT. However, I don't know how common it is for eye infections and whether it really was caused by the improper sterilization... I would want to know a little more about such things before I blame the young doctor. Plus, it could have been the poor man's fault...maybe he didn't obey the doctor's instuctions for cleaning/caring for his eye.

In addition, if the young doctor was to blame and had attemped to correct his mistake (monetary compensation or doing the artificial eye for free), then I would hesitate to bring the lawsuit against him...just becuase he's showing that he's truely sorry and is trying to make up for it. But if not, I would not feel bad about possibly ruining his career.

I hope my post wasn't too boring for you too read

 

[allmightylong]

i think this is a rather dicey situation since it's assumingly in a country where patient's right against malpractice infrastructure is not in place. Unfortunately, i think it take a revolution to hack into the existing elitist code of conduct or a change in government policy(which i doubt if there is no reasons to
) Thus, i think the poor man should try to see if there is any support groups/lawyers available to him to voice his concerns.

 

[ecranda]

So sad. This is a very hard question and I do not know what I would do. I can say that in the context of my life and experiences in America, I would testify against the doctor. But, since this influences my opinion I cannot say what I would do if in the same situation as that doctor. It is very sad to think that this has happened. My heart goes out for the man and I hope that I can be a better doctor than the two you have described. I hope you use this experience to make you a better person. It sounds like it has effected you, which shows your good nature.

And your English is good! You are doing just fine. I did not see any mistakes and could understand you completely.

 

[CalBeE]

I agree with most of the posts above, but would like to add that:

In the U.S. lawsuits seem to be the usual way people use to deal with faults by physicians. However, this is not a universally accepted concept. It sorta reminds me of the issue of informed consent. People in the U.S. are more informed of the medical procedures out there and the risks associated, so getting informed consent from them make sense. However, in places where the patients know nothing about medical procedure, even if you explain everything to them, they're just gonna let the decision up to the physician. That kinda defeat the whole purpose of a "consent"

And I agree that if the young physician is willing to compensate the patient with money or other things, a lawsuit should be avoided.

 

[NE_Cornhusker1]

as callous as it sounds how can you be sure the instruments were not sterile? this poor guy's case is predicated on the assumption that the instruments were incorrectly sterilized. infections happen for reasons other than non-sterile instruments. i feel bad for this guy but can blame this opthalmologist for not testifying.

 

[dara678]

Can I ask which country this is? I'm interested to know because my parents are also from a SE Asian country ...